Gender comparisons of function-related dependence pain and insecurity in geriatric rehabilitation
2006 (English)In: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, ISSN 1650-1977, Vol. 38, no 1, 73-79 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate possible gender differences regarding the effect of intervention in geriatric rehabilitation, expressed in terms of change in function-related dependence, pain and insecurity. DESIGN: Comparative study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 110 women and 44 men undergoing geriatric rehabilitation. METHODS: Performance-based assessments with use of the General Motor Function assessment scale. Non-parametric statistics were mainly used. RESULTS: The women showed higher degrees of function-related dependence, pain and insecurity on admission than the men. Both women and men displayed significant improvement in all 3 variables during the rehabilitation period. However, the positive changes regarding pain and insecurity were according to the analyses of systematic group changes, at a low degree among the men, probably because of the low levels on admission. Gender comparisons of proportions with positive intervention outcome indicated that a significantly larger proportion of the women showed a positive treatment effect after intervention, with a difference in recovery of 19% in dependence, 23% in pain and 33% in insecurity (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Gender differences in disability, with higher degrees of function-related dependence, pain and insecurity among women on admission for geriatric rehabilitation, can be diminished during the rehabilitation period. These promising results may have relevance for the public health of the elderly population.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2006. Vol. 38, no 1, 73-79 p.
Geriatric, rehabilitation, gender, motor function
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-103514DOI: 10.1080/16501970510041235PubMedID: 16548092OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-103514DiVA: diva2:218366
Ursprungligen publicerad i Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 2005, vol. 37, nr. 6, s. 378-384 (se Erratum http://jrm.medicaljournals.se/article/pdf/10.1080/16501970610047021)2009-05-192009-05-192010-08-16Bibliographically approved