芬兰脊髓损伤患者感知到的环境障碍:横断面调查。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Spinal cord Pub Date : 2024-04-23 DOI:10.1038/s41393-024-00990-x
Sanna-Mari Saarimäki, Paula Reiterä, Anni Täckman, Jari Arokoski, Aki Vainionpää, Mauri Kallinen, Susanna Tallqvist, Eerika Koskinen, Harri Hämäläinen, Anna-Maija Kauppila, Heidi Anttila, Sinikka Hiekkala
{"title":"芬兰脊髓损伤患者感知到的环境障碍:横断面调查。","authors":"Sanna-Mari Saarimäki, Paula Reiterä, Anni Täckman, Jari Arokoski, Aki Vainionpää, Mauri Kallinen, Susanna Tallqvist, Eerika Koskinen, Harri Hämäläinen, Anna-Maija Kauppila, Heidi Anttila, Sinikka Hiekkala","doi":"10.1038/s41393-024-00990-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cross-sectional survey of the Finnish population with spinal cord injury (SCI). To explore the frequencies of perceived environmental barriers (EB) that made participation harder for the Finnish population with SCI and to compare the occurrence of perceived EBs by gender, age, time since injury, and injury severity. Participants were recruited from the registers of the three SCI outpatient clinics responsible for the lifelong care of people with SCI in Finland. The self-administered Nottwil Environmental Factors Inventory Short Form (NEFI-SF) collected in the Finnish Spinal Cord Injury Study (FinSCI) (n = 1772) was used. Nonparametric tests and multinomial logistic regression models were utilized. 880 individuals responded to the NEFI-SF items (response rate 50%). Climate was perceived as a barrier by 72% and a serious one by 44% of the respondents. The rates regarding public access were 59% and 24%, private home access 46% and 18%, and long-distance transport 45% and 20%. Four out of ten respondents reported that finances, lack of assistive devices for short-distance transport, and political decisions restricted their participation. The NEFI-SF total scores were higher (meaning more perceived restrictions by EBs) for those more severely injured. Climate, access to public and private places, challenges with transport, finances, and political decisions were the EBs most frequently perceived to restrict participation by the Finnish population with SCI. Most EBs that were prominent causes of restrictions are modifiable. Greater accessibility to the built environment, equal services to all, and positive special treatment could reduce their effects.","PeriodicalId":21976,"journal":{"name":"Spinal cord","volume":"62 6","pages":"348-355"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41393-024-00990-x.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental barriers perceived by the Finnish population with spinal cord injury: a cross-sectional survey\",\"authors\":\"Sanna-Mari Saarimäki, Paula Reiterä, Anni Täckman, Jari Arokoski, Aki Vainionpää, Mauri Kallinen, Susanna Tallqvist, Eerika Koskinen, Harri Hämäläinen, Anna-Maija Kauppila, Heidi Anttila, Sinikka Hiekkala\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41393-024-00990-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Cross-sectional survey of the Finnish population with spinal cord injury (SCI). To explore the frequencies of perceived environmental barriers (EB) that made participation harder for the Finnish population with SCI and to compare the occurrence of perceived EBs by gender, age, time since injury, and injury severity. Participants were recruited from the registers of the three SCI outpatient clinics responsible for the lifelong care of people with SCI in Finland. The self-administered Nottwil Environmental Factors Inventory Short Form (NEFI-SF) collected in the Finnish Spinal Cord Injury Study (FinSCI) (n = 1772) was used. Nonparametric tests and multinomial logistic regression models were utilized. 880 individuals responded to the NEFI-SF items (response rate 50%). Climate was perceived as a barrier by 72% and a serious one by 44% of the respondents. The rates regarding public access were 59% and 24%, private home access 46% and 18%, and long-distance transport 45% and 20%. Four out of ten respondents reported that finances, lack of assistive devices for short-distance transport, and political decisions restricted their participation. The NEFI-SF total scores were higher (meaning more perceived restrictions by EBs) for those more severely injured. Climate, access to public and private places, challenges with transport, finances, and political decisions were the EBs most frequently perceived to restrict participation by the Finnish population with SCI. Most EBs that were prominent causes of restrictions are modifiable. Greater accessibility to the built environment, equal services to all, and positive special treatment could reduce their effects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spinal cord\",\"volume\":\"62 6\",\"pages\":\"348-355\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41393-024-00990-x.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spinal cord\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41393-024-00990-x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spinal cord","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41393-024-00990-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对芬兰脊髓损伤(SCI)患者进行横断面调查。调查芬兰脊髓损伤患者认为会增加参与难度的环境障碍(EB)的频率,并比较不同性别、年龄、受伤时间和损伤严重程度的环境障碍发生率。研究人员从负责芬兰 SCI 患者终身护理的三家 SCI 门诊诊所的登记册中招募参与者。在芬兰脊髓损伤研究(FinSCI)(n = 1772)中收集的自填式诺特威尔环境因素调查简表(NEFI-SF)被用于调查。使用了非参数检验和多项式逻辑回归模型。共有 880 人回答了 NEFI-SF 项目(回答率为 50%)。72%的受访者认为气候是一个障碍,44%的受访者认为气候是一个严重障碍。59%和 24%的受访者认为公共交通是障碍,46%和 18%的受访者认为私人住宅是障碍,45%和 20%的受访者认为长途交通是障碍。每 10 位受访者中就有 4 位表示,资金、缺乏短途交通辅助设备以及政治决策限制了他们的参与。伤势较重的受访者的 NEFI-SF 总分更高(意味着他们认为 EB 受到的限制更多)。气候、进入公共和私人场所、交通挑战、财务和政治决策是芬兰SCI患者最常认为限制其参与的环境因素。大多数限制因素都是可以改变的。提高建筑环境的无障碍性、为所有人提供平等服务以及积极的特殊待遇,都可以减少其影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Environmental barriers perceived by the Finnish population with spinal cord injury: a cross-sectional survey
Cross-sectional survey of the Finnish population with spinal cord injury (SCI). To explore the frequencies of perceived environmental barriers (EB) that made participation harder for the Finnish population with SCI and to compare the occurrence of perceived EBs by gender, age, time since injury, and injury severity. Participants were recruited from the registers of the three SCI outpatient clinics responsible for the lifelong care of people with SCI in Finland. The self-administered Nottwil Environmental Factors Inventory Short Form (NEFI-SF) collected in the Finnish Spinal Cord Injury Study (FinSCI) (n = 1772) was used. Nonparametric tests and multinomial logistic regression models were utilized. 880 individuals responded to the NEFI-SF items (response rate 50%). Climate was perceived as a barrier by 72% and a serious one by 44% of the respondents. The rates regarding public access were 59% and 24%, private home access 46% and 18%, and long-distance transport 45% and 20%. Four out of ten respondents reported that finances, lack of assistive devices for short-distance transport, and political decisions restricted their participation. The NEFI-SF total scores were higher (meaning more perceived restrictions by EBs) for those more severely injured. Climate, access to public and private places, challenges with transport, finances, and political decisions were the EBs most frequently perceived to restrict participation by the Finnish population with SCI. Most EBs that were prominent causes of restrictions are modifiable. Greater accessibility to the built environment, equal services to all, and positive special treatment could reduce their effects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Spinal cord
Spinal cord 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
142
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Spinal Cord is a specialised, international journal that has been publishing spinal cord related manuscripts since 1963. It appears monthly, online and in print, and accepts contributions on spinal cord anatomy, physiology, management of injury and disease, and the quality of life and life circumstances of people with a spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord is multi-disciplinary and publishes contributions across the entire spectrum of research ranging from basic science to applied clinical research. It focuses on high quality original research, systematic reviews and narrative reviews. Spinal Cord''s sister journal Spinal Cord Series and Cases: Clinical Management in Spinal Cord Disorders publishes high quality case reports, small case series, pilot and retrospective studies perspectives, Pulse survey articles, Point-couterpoint articles, correspondences and book reviews. It specialises in material that addresses all aspects of life for persons with spinal cord injuries or disorders. For more information, please see the aims and scope of Spinal Cord Series and Cases.
期刊最新文献
The influencing factors for tracheostomy decannulation after traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: a retrospective study. "What should a rehabilitation hospital be like?" Priorities and expectations of people with spinal cord injury in Türkiye. The effect of abdominal functional electrical stimulation on blood pressure in people with high level spinal cord injury. Mortality and causes of death of traumatic spinal cord injury in Finland. Correspondence to "Walking improvement in chronic incomplete spinal cord injury with exoskeleton robotic training (WISE): a randomized controlled trial".
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1