Freburger Janet K, Mormer Elizabeth R, Ressel Kristin, Zhang Shuqi, Johnson Anna M, Pastva Amy M, Turner Rose L, Coyle Peter C, Bushnell Cheryl D, Duncan Pamela W, Berkeley Sara B Jones
Department of Physical Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
Department of Physical Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2025 May;106(5):759-770. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2024.10.010. Epub 2024 Nov 2.
To summarize current reports in the literature on disparities in rehabilitation after stroke; identify gaps in our understanding of rehabilitation disparities; and make recommendations for future research.
A health sciences librarian developed a search string based on an a priori protocol and searched Medline (Ovid) Embase (Elsevier), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL and EBSCO).
A 2-step screening process of titles and abstracts followed by full-text review was conducted. Primary observational studies conducted in the United States that reported on disparities in rehabilitation (ie, physical, occupational, or speech therapy) among adults after stroke were retained. Eligible disparity populations included racial minorities; ethnic minorities; sex and gender minorities; older populations; socioeconomically disadvantaged populations; and geographic minorities (inner city/rural).
Data extracted from retained articles included: aims/objectives; data source; sample characteristics, rehabilitation outcomes examined; types of disparities examined; statistical methods used; and disparity findings.
Seven thousand eight hundred fifty-three titles and abstracts were screened, and 473 articles underwent full-text review. Forty-nine articles were included for data extraction and analysis. Many articles examined more than 1 disparity type with most examining disparities in race and/or ethnicity (n=43, 87.7%), followed by sex (n=25, 53.0%), age (n=23, 46.9%), socioeconomic status (n=22, 44.9%), and urban/rural status (n=8, 16.3%). Articles varied widely by sample characteristics, data sources, rehabilitation outcomes, and methods of examining disparities.
Although we found some consistent evidence of disparities in rehabilitation for older individuals, non-White races, and individuals of lower socioeconomic status, the variability in methods made the synthesis of findings challenging. Further work, including additional well-designed studies and systematic reviews, and/or meta-analyses of current studies, is needed to better understand the extent of rehabilitation disparities after stroke.
总结文献中关于卒中后康复差异的当前报告;识别我们对康复差异理解上的差距;并为未来研究提出建议。
一位健康科学图书馆员根据预先制定的方案制定了搜索词,并检索了Medline(Ovid)、Embase(爱思唯尔)以及护理与联合健康文献累积索引(CINAHL和EBSCO)。
进行了两步筛选过程,先筛选标题和摘要,然后进行全文审查。保留在美国进行的关于卒中后成年人康复差异(即物理治疗、职业治疗或言语治疗)的主要观察性研究。符合条件的差异人群包括少数种族;少数民族;性取向和性别少数群体;老年人群;社会经济弱势人群;以及地理上的少数群体(市中心/农村)。
从保留的文章中提取的数据包括:目的;数据来源;样本特征、所检查的康复结果;所检查的差异类型;使用的统计方法;以及差异研究结果。
筛选了7853篇标题和摘要,473篇文章进行了全文审查。49篇文章被纳入数据提取和分析。许多文章研究了不止一种差异类型,大多数研究了种族和/或族裔差异(n = 43,87.7%),其次是性别差异(n = 25,53.0%)、年龄差异(n = 23,46.9%)、社会经济地位差异(n = 22,44.9%)和城乡差异(n = 8,16.3%)。文章在样本特征、数据来源、康复结果和差异检查方法方面差异很大。
尽管我们发现了一些关于老年个体、非白人种族以及社会经济地位较低个体康复差异的一致证据,但方法的变异性使得研究结果的综合具有挑战性。需要进一步开展工作,包括更多设计良好的研究以及对当前研究的系统评价和/或荟萃分析,以更好地了解卒中后康复差异的程度。