Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2015
Predicting community participation after spinal cord injury in Thailand.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Suttiwong Jatuporn, Vongsirinavarat Mantana, Chaiyawat Pakaratee, Vachalathiti Roongtiwa
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To identify the predictors of community participation after spinal cord injury.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional design.
METHODS: A total of 139 persons with spinal cord injury living in the community completed 4 instruments: the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA-Thai version), the Craig Hospital Inventory of Environmental Factors (CHIEF-SF-Thai version), the Personal Resource Questionnaire (PRQ2000-Thai version), and a personal history questionnaire. Functional performance was assessed using the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) motor subscale.
RESULTS: Participants comprised 79% males. Fifty-one percent of variance in community participation was explained by social support, functional performance, age, and age at time of injury.
CONCLUSION: Key predictors of community participation were the availability of social support and the individual's functional performance. These predictors should be emphasized when developing interventions in rehabilitation and community settings.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional design.
METHODS: A total of 139 persons with spinal cord injury living in the community completed 4 instruments: the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA-Thai version), the Craig Hospital Inventory of Environmental Factors (CHIEF-SF-Thai version), the Personal Resource Questionnaire (PRQ2000-Thai version), and a personal history questionnaire. Functional performance was assessed using the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) motor subscale.
RESULTS: Participants comprised 79% males. Fifty-one percent of variance in community participation was explained by social support, functional performance, age, and age at time of injury.
CONCLUSION: Key predictors of community participation were the availability of social support and the individual's functional performance. These predictors should be emphasized when developing interventions in rehabilitation and community settings.