Semergen · 2018
[Prevalence of homebound older people in Spain].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ayala A, Pujol R, Abellán A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The number of older people with functional or other problems that prevent them from going out of doors is unknown. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of homebound status in Spain and to determine their main characteristics.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health was used. Homebound status was defined according to the declared difficulty with regard to mobility outside the home: completely homebound (not able to leave home), semi-homebound (have serious difficulties but can leave with help), and the individuals without problems that were not homebound. Capacity and performance qualifiers were used to assess the final impact of technical or personal help. Prevalences were calculated, and sociodemographic and health characteristics were compared for the different groups.
RESULTS: Out of a total of 2,146,362 older people with disabilities, 8.1% (95% CI: 8.1-8.2) and 16.0% (95% CI: 15.9-16.0) were (complete) homebound, and semi-homebound, respectively. The homebound elderly were mostly women, had a higher mean age and low education level. They also declared they had more difficulty for the environmental barriers, had worse perceived health, a greater number of disabilities, chronic health conditions, and more functional problems.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of older disabled people with a homebound status was 24.1%. The social, health, and functional characteristics suggest situations of vulnerability. The information on homebound individuals could contribute to enhance social and health plans, and to raise the visibility of this problem.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health was used. Homebound status was defined according to the declared difficulty with regard to mobility outside the home: completely homebound (not able to leave home), semi-homebound (have serious difficulties but can leave with help), and the individuals without problems that were not homebound. Capacity and performance qualifiers were used to assess the final impact of technical or personal help. Prevalences were calculated, and sociodemographic and health characteristics were compared for the different groups.
RESULTS: Out of a total of 2,146,362 older people with disabilities, 8.1% (95% CI: 8.1-8.2) and 16.0% (95% CI: 15.9-16.0) were (complete) homebound, and semi-homebound, respectively. The homebound elderly were mostly women, had a higher mean age and low education level. They also declared they had more difficulty for the environmental barriers, had worse perceived health, a greater number of disabilities, chronic health conditions, and more functional problems.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of older disabled people with a homebound status was 24.1%. The social, health, and functional characteristics suggest situations of vulnerability. The information on homebound individuals could contribute to enhance social and health plans, and to raise the visibility of this problem.