4.5 Article

The role of the environment in falls among stroke survivors

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2017.04.007

关键词

Stroke; Epidemiology; Outcome after stroke; Stroke in elderly; Falls

资金

  1. National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities [R01MD008879]
  2. National Institute of Aging [U01AG032947]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Stroke survivors' risk of falls may be particularly sensitive to the environment due to deficits such as visuospatial neglect or homonymous hemianopia. We sought to identify the prevalence of falls among stroke survivors and investigate the possible role of the environment in falling. Materials and methods: Data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), a nationally representative population of community-dwelling adults over 65, were used. We compared the prevalence of falling in the past month between stroke survivors and demographic and comorbidity matched controls using sequential Poisson regression models. Results: The proportion of stroke survivors reporting a fall in the previous month was 18.8% compared to 10.8% among matched controls (PR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.36-2.25). These differences were attenuated after adjusting for known confounders, mediators and aspects of the environment (PR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.86-1.60). Indoor tripping hazards were associated with falls (PR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.01-1.53). The association between stroke and falls was modified by neighborhood social disorder, such that in areas of low social disorder, falls in the previous month were more common in stroke survivors compared to non-stroke controls. Conclusions: The difference in falls among stroke survivors and matched controls is largely explained by known risk factors and physical capacity. Indoor tripping hazards were associated with falls among stroke survivors and matched controls. Explanations of why the association between stroke and falls was protective in areas of high social disorder are unclear, but may warrant additional research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据