Zhang Shuqi, Mormer Elizabeth R, Johnson Anna M, Bushnell Cheryl D, Duncan Pamela W, Wen Fang, Pathak Shweta, Pastva Amy M, Freburger Janet K, Jones Berkeley Sara B
Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Department of Physical Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2025 Jan 10;25(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-12142-1.
Timely rehabilitative care is vital for functional recovery after stroke. Social determinants may influence access to and use of post-stroke care but have been inadequately explored. The study examined the relationship between the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and community-based rehabilitation utilization.
We included 6,843 adults (51.6% female; 75.1% White; mean age 70.1) discharged home after a stroke enrolled in the COMprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services study, a pragmatic trial conducted in 40 North Carolina hospitals from 2016-2019. Rehabilitation utilization was sourced from administrative claims. Geocoded addresses were linked to 2018 Census tract SVI. Associations between SVI and 90-day rehabilitation use, adjusted for patient's clinical and socio-economic characteristics, were obtained from generalized estimating equations. We also examined the associations of SVI with therapy setting, types of therapy, intensity of visits, and time to first visit.
Thirty-five percent of patients had at least one physical (PT) or occupational therapy (OT) visit within 90 days, ranging from 32.4%-38.7% across SVI quintiles. In adjusted analysis, there was no dose-reponse relationship between higher summary SVI, nor most of its sub-domains, and 90-day rehabilitation use. Greater vulnerability in household composition and disability was modestly associated with -0.4% (95% CI -4.1% to 3.4%) to -4.3% (95% CI -0.8% to -7.7%) lower rehabilitation use across SVI quartiles. Greater summary and subdomain SVI was associated with higher odds of receiving therapy in the home versus outpatient clinic (OR = 1.88, 1.58 to 2.17 for Q5 vs Q1 summary SVI) and receiving both PT and OT versus a single-type therapy (1.72, 1.48 to 1.97 for Q5 vs. Q1 summary SVI). No differences were observed for therapy intensity or time to therapy.
Use of rehabilitation care was low, and largely similar across levels of SVI and most of its subdomains. Individuals residing in areas of high SVI were more likely to receive therapy in the home and to receive dual therapy, possibly reflecting greater need among these individuals. Future studies should evaluate potential mechanisms for these findings and further identify both patient and community factors that may inform strategies to improve rehabilitation use.
gov/ NCT02588664 [registration date: 2015-10-23].
及时的康复护理对中风后的功能恢复至关重要。社会决定因素可能会影响中风后护理的可及性和使用情况,但尚未得到充分研究。本研究探讨了社会脆弱性指数(SVI)与社区康复利用之间的关系。
我们纳入了6843名中风后出院回家的成年人(女性占51.6%;白人占75.1%;平均年龄70.1岁),这些患者参与了“综合急性中风后服务”研究,这是一项于2016年至2019年在北卡罗来纳州40家医院进行的实用试验。康复利用情况来源于行政索赔数据。地理编码地址与2018年人口普查区的SVI相关联。通过广义估计方程,在调整了患者的临床和社会经济特征后,得出SVI与90天康复使用之间的关联。我们还研究了SVI与治疗环境、治疗类型、就诊强度以及首次就诊时间之间的关联。
35%的患者在90天内至少有一次物理治疗(PT)或职业治疗(OT)就诊,在SVI五分位数中,这一比例在32.4%至38.7%之间。在调整分析中,较高的综合SVI及其大多数子领域与90天康复使用之间没有剂量反应关系。在SVI四分位数中,家庭构成和残疾方面更大的脆弱性与康复使用降低0.4%(95%可信区间 -4.1%至3.4%)至 -4.3%(95%可信区间 -0.8%至 -7.7%)存在适度关联。更高的综合和子领域SVI与在家中接受治疗而非门诊治疗的较高几率相关(对于综合SVI的第5五分位数与第1五分位数,比值比 = 1.88,1.58至2.17),以及接受PT和OT两种治疗而非单一类型治疗的几率相关(对于综合SVI的第5五分位数与第1五分位数,比值比为1.72,1.48至1.97)。在治疗强度或治疗时间方面未观察到差异。
康复护理的使用率较低,在SVI及其大多数子领域的不同水平上大致相似。居住在SVI高的地区的个体更有可能在家中接受治疗并接受双重治疗,这可能反映了这些个体有更大的需求。未来的研究应评估这些发现的潜在机制,并进一步确定可能为改善康复利用策略提供信息的患者和社区因素。
gov/ NCT02588664 [注册日期:2015 - 10 - 23]