BACKGROUND: Rural residents are less likely to receive preventive health screening, more likely to be uninsured, and more likely to report fair to poor health than urban residents. Social disconnectedness and perceived isolation are known to be negative predictors of self-rated physical health; however, the direct effects of geographic isolation and social support on overall health have not been well elucidated. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of women (n = 113) participating in Wisconsin Rural Women's initiative programming was conducted, which included measures of geographic isolation, an assessment of overall health, and social support using the validated Interpersonal Support Evaluation List with 3 subscales, including belonging support, tangible support, and appraisal support. RESULTS: Geographic isolation was shown to be a negative predictor of belonging support (P = .0064) and tangible support (P = .0349); however, geographic isolation was not a statistically significant predictor of appraisal support. A strong and direct relationship was observed between social support and self-perceived health status among this population of Wisconsin women, and hospital access based on geographic proximity was positively correlated (P = .028) with overall health status. CONCLUSIONS: The direct relationship between social support and overall health demonstrated here stresses the importance of developing and maintaining strong social support networks, which can be improved through rural support groups that have the unique ability to assist rural residents in fostering social support systems, advocating stress management techniques, and achieving a greater sense of well-being.
BACKGROUND: Rural residents are less likely to receive preventive health screening, more likely to be uninsured, and more likely to report fair to poor health than urban residents. Social disconnectedness and perceived isolation are known to be negative predictors of self-rated physical health; however, the direct effects of geographic isolation and social support on overall health have not been well elucidated. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of women (n = 113) participating in Wisconsin Rural Women's initiative programming was conducted, which included measures of geographic isolation, an assessment of overall health, and social support using the validated Interpersonal Support Evaluation List with 3 subscales, including belonging support, tangible support, and appraisal support. RESULTS: Geographic isolation was shown to be a negative predictor of belonging support (P = .0064) and tangible support (P = .0349); however, geographic isolation was not a statistically significant predictor of appraisal support. A strong and direct relationship was observed between social support and self-perceived health status among this population of Wisconsin women, and hospital access based on geographic proximity was positively correlated (P = .028) with overall health status. CONCLUSIONS: The direct relationship between social support and overall health demonstrated here stresses the importance of developing and maintaining strong social support networks, which can be improved through rural support groups that have the unique ability to assist rural residents in fostering social support systems, advocating stress management techniques, and achieving a greater sense of well-being.
Authors: Patrice M Hicks; Benjamin Haaland; Michael Feehan; Alan S Crandall; Jeff H Pettey; Elizabeth Nuttall; William Self; Mary Elizabeth Hartnett; Paul Bernstein; Albert Vitale; Akbar Shakoor; Julia P Shulman; Sandra F Sieminski; Ivana Kim; Leah A Owen; Maureen A Murtaugh; Albert Noyes; Margaret M DeAngelis Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-11-07 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Patrice M Hicks; Elizabeth Au; William Self; Benjamin Haaland; Michael Feehan; Leah A Owen; Adam Siedlecki; Elizabeth Nuttall; Deborah Harrison; Andrew L Reynolds; John H Lillvis; Sandra Sieminski; Julia P Shulman; Margarita Barnoya; Juan Jose Noguera Prera; Orlando Gonzalez; Maureen A Murtaugh; Lloyd B Williams; Michael H Farkas; Alan S Crandall; Margaret M DeAngelis Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-07-06 Impact factor: 3.390