Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-mnklg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T09:44:57.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Activity Participation Differences Between Younger and Older Individuals with Stroke

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 June 2012

Timothy J. Wolf,
Joseph K. Brey,
Carolyn Baum and
Lisa Tabor Connor
Timothy J. Wolf*
Affiliation:
The Cognitive Rehabilitation Research Group, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Joseph K. Brey
Affiliation:
The Cognitive Rehabilitation Research Group, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Carolyn Baum
Affiliation:
The Cognitive Rehabilitation Research Group, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Lisa Tabor Connor
Affiliation:
The Cognitive Rehabilitation Research Group, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Timothy J. Wolf, Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, Campus Box 8505, 4444 Forest Park, St. Louis, MO 63108USA. E-mail: wolft@wustl.edu
Get access

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to describe differences in activity participation between younger and older individuals with stroke to inform transition after stroke. This was a cross-sectional study with individuals six-months poststroke (n = 177). All individuals completed an outcomes assessment battery that included the Stroke Impact Scale, the Reintegration to Normal Living Index and the Activity Card Sort. The sample was divided into two groups: (1) Young — those under the age of 65 (n = 89); and (2) Old — those 65 or older (n = 88). Analysis was completed to examine differences between the groups on the primary outcome measures of the study and to look at differences between the groups on individual questions/items on the specific measures. The results of this study demonstrate: (1) significant differences in both the quantity and nature of activity participation prior to and after stroke between younger and older stroke survivors and (2) total scores and measures of central tendency do not necessarily provide therapists with the information they need to guide treatment. Rehabilitation professionals should focus on providing clients with the tools they will need to be successful in transitioning back to home and community environments once rehabilitation has ended.

Keywords

strokerehabilitationoccupational therapyparticipation

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Brain Impairment , Volume 13 , Issue 1: Transition to Community Living after Acquired Brain Injury , July 2012, pp. 16 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Baum, C.M., & Edwards, D. (2001). The Washington University Activity Card Sort. St Louis, MO: PenUltima Press.Google Scholar
Brown, D.L., Boden-Albala, B., Langa, K.M., Lisabeth, L.D., Fair, M., Smith, M.A., . . . Morgenstern, L.B. (2006). Projected costs of ischemic stroke in the United States. Neurology, 67 (8), 1390–1395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carpenter, B.D., Edwards, D.F., Pickard, D.F., Palmer, J.L., Morrow-Howell, N., Neufeld, P.S., . . . Morris, J.C. (2007). Anticipating relocation: Concerns about moving among NORC residents. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 49, 165–184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cott, C.A., Wiles, R., & Devitt, R. (2007). Continuity, transition and participation: Preparing clients for life in the community post-stroke. Disability & Rehabilitation, 29 (20–21), 1566–1574.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, P.W., Lai, S.M., Bode, R.K., Perera, S., & DeRosa, J. (2003). Stroke Impact Scale-16: A brief assessment of physical function. Neurology, 60 (2), 291–296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, P.W., Wallace, D., Lai, S.M., Johnson, D., Embretson, S., & Laster, L.J. (1999). The Stroke Impact Scale version 2.0: Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke, 30, 2131–2140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, B., & O'Connell, B. (2003). Internal consistency and validity of the Stroke Impact Scale 2.0 (SIS 2.0) and SIS-16 in an Australian sample. Quality of Life Research, 12, 1127–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, D., Hahn, M., Baum, C., & Dromerick, A. (2006). The impact of mild stroke on meaningful activity and life satisfaction. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 15 (4), 151–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Everard, K.M., Lach, H.W., Fisher, E.B., & Baum, C.M. (2000). Relationship of activity and social support to the functional health of older adults. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 55B, S208–S212.Google Scholar
Hartman-Maeir, A., Soroker, N., Ring, H., Avni, N., & Katz, N. (2007). Activities, participation and satisfaction one-year post stroke. Disability & Rehabilitation, 29 (7), 559–566.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harwood, M., Weatherall, M., Talemaitoga, A., Barber, P.A., Gommans, J., Taylor, W., . . . McNaughton, H. (2011). Taking charge after stroke: promoting self-directed rehabilitation to improve quality of life: A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation, Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/0269215511426017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hildebrand, M., Brewer, M., & Wolf, T. (2012). The impact of mild stroke on participation in physical fitness activities. Stroke Research and Treatment, Article ID 548682, 6 pgs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kersten, P., Low, J.T.S., Ashburn, A., George, S L., & McLellan, D.L. (2002). The unmet needs of young people who have had a stroke: results of a national UK survey. Disability & Rehabilitation, 24 (16), 860–866.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayo, N.E., Wood-Dauphinee, S., Cote, R., Durcan, L., & Carlton, J. (2002). Activity, participation, and quality of life 6 months poststroke. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 83 (8), 1035–1042.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roger, V.L., Go, A.S., Lloyd-Jones, D.M., Adams, R.J., Berry, J.D., Brown, T.M., . . . Wylie-Rosett, J. (2011). Heart disease and stroke statistics–2011 update: A report from the American Heart Association. Circulation, 123 (4), e18–e209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sachs, D., & Josman, N. (2003). The Activity Card Sort: A factor analysis. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 23, 165–176.Google Scholar
Snogren, M., & Sunnerhagen, K.S. (2009). Description of functional disability among younger stroke patients: Exploration of activity and participation and environmental factors. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 32 (2), 124–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stark, S.L., Edwards, D.F., Hollingsworth, H., & Gray, D.B. (2005). Validation of the Reintegration to Normal Living Index in a population of community-dwelling people with mobility limitations. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 86, 344–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, T.J., Baum, C., & Connor, L.T. (2009). Changing face of stroke: Implications for occupational therapy practice. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63 (5), 621–625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood-Dauphinee, S.L., Opzoomer, M.A., Williams, J.I., Marchand, B., & Spitzer, W.O. (1988). Assessment of global function: The Reintegration to Normal Living Index. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 69, 583–590.Google ScholarPubMed