Main author: Steinunn A. Ólafsdóttir
Institution or Company: Department of Physical Therapy at the Faculty of Medicine at University of Iceland
Co-Authors, Institution or Company:
Helga Jónsdóttir, Faculty of Nursing at the University of Iceland. Ingibjörg Hjaltadóttir, Faculty of Nursing at the University of Iceland. Rose Galvin, School of Allied Health at the University of Limerick. Sólveig Ása Árnadóttir, Department of Physical Therapy at the Faculty of Medicine at University of Iceland. Þóra Berglind Hafsteinsdóttir, Department of Nursing Science at Julius Center at the University Medical Center Utrecht, Department of Health care for people with chronic illness at the University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Nursing at the University of Iceland.
Introduction: The incidence of stroke increases with age and 75% of all strokes are among adults older than 65 years of age. In studies, functioning of stroke survivors is often compared between individuals who are younger and older than 65 years and may therefore not capture the important variations in functioning among the heterogeneous group of stroke survivors older than 65 years old.
Methods: A cross-sectional population-based survey (56.2% response rate). The participants (N=114, 50% men, 71.6±12.9 years) were divided into three age-groups; 75 years and older (n=51), 65-74 years old (n=34) and younger than 65 years old (n=29). The Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) was used to assess strength, memory and thinking, emotions, communication, activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental ADLs, mobility, hand function, participation and perceived recovery.
Results: Individuals in the older-old had lower scores than both younger groups in the domains of ADLs/IADLs (65-74 years old P=0.037, <65 years old P<0.001,) and mobility (65-74 years old P=0.016, <65 years old P<0.001) and lower scores than the youngest group in participation (P=0.005). No difference was found between the age-groups in strength, memory and thinking, emotions, communication, hand function and perceived recovery.
Conclusions: Sixty-five years might not be the ideal cut-off of age for studying community-dwelling stroke survivors. Moreover, the findings reveal the need to direct the focus of rehabilitation and research towards the heterogeneous group of older stroke survivors in order to discover how to best meet their community requirements.
