title: Community Stroke Rehabilitation: How Do Rural Residents Fare Compared With Their Urban Counterparts?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Rural living has been demonstrated to have an effect on a person's overall health status, and rural residing individuals often have decreased access to health and specialized rehabilitation services.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to determine if there are differences in recovery from stroke between urban and rural-dwelling stroke survivors accessing an in-home, community-based, interdisciplinary, stroke rehabilitation program.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data from a cohort of 1222 stroke survivors receiving care from the Community Stroke Rehabilitation Teams between January 2009 and June 2013 was analyzed. This program delivers stroke rehabilitation care directly in a person's home and community. Functional and psychosocial outcomes were evaluated at baseline, discharge, and six -month follow-up. A series of multiple linear regression analyses was performed to determine if rural versus urban status was a significant predictor of discharge and 6-month health outcomes.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The mean age of the rural cohort was 68.8 (±13.1) years (53.6% male), and the urban cohort was 68.4 (±13.0) years (44.8% male). A total of 278 (35.4%) individuals were classified as living in a rural area using the Rurality Index for Ontario. In multivariate linear regression analysis, no significant differences on the Functional Independence Measure, the Stroke Impact Scale, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, or the Reintegration to Normal Living Index were found between urban and rural cohorts.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  When provided with access to a home-based, specialized stroke rehabilitation program, rural dwelling stroke survivors make and maintain functional gains comparable to their urban-living counterparts.
authors.affiliation: 1Lawson Health Research Institute,London,Ontario.
authors.forename: Laura
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Allen
authors.affiliation: 1Lawson Health Research Institute,London,Ontario.
authors.forename: Amanda
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: McIntyre
authors.affiliation: 1Lawson Health Research Institute,London,Ontario.
authors.forename: Shannon
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Janzen
authors.affiliation: 1Lawson Health Research Institute,London,Ontario.
authors.forename: Marina
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Richardson
authors.affiliation: 1Lawson Health Research Institute,London,Ontario.
authors.forename: Matthew
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Meyer
authors.affiliation: 2St. Joseph's Health Care,London,Ontario.
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Ure
authors.affiliation: 1Lawson Health Research Institute,London,Ontario.
authors.forename: Robert
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Teasell
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D003153:Community Health Services / Q000592:standards*; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006699:Home Care Services / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D000066530:Neurological Rehabilitation / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D012424:Rural Population / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D000071939:Stroke Rehabilitation; D014505:Urban Population / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*
keywords: Community; Rehabilitation; Rural; Stroke