We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Quality of life after spinal cord injury: a comparison across six countries.
Spinal Cord 2013 April
STUDY DESIGN: An international cross-sectional study.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the quality of life (QoL) of people with spinal cord injury (SCI) across six countries worldwide, controlling for socio-demographic and lesion-related sample characteristics and using a cross-culturally valid assessment.
METHODS: Data from 243 persons with SCI from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, South Africa and the United States were analyzed. QoL was measured using five satisfaction items from the World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment. Cross-culturally valid, Rasch-transformed scores were used for comparison.
RESULTS: Analysis of variance showed a significant difference in QoL between countries (F=3.938; df=5; P=0.002). Shorter time since injury, no paid employment and living in Brazil were significant predictors of lower QoL, explaining 13% of variance in linear regression. Using multilevel regression with country as higher-order variable, time since injury and paid employment remained significant predictors and explained 18% of variance in QoL. The intraclass correlation coefficient (0.05) indicates that 5% of the variability can be accounted for by country.
CONCLUSION: This study showed QoL differences between countries that could not be explained by differences in demographic and lesion-related characteristics. Results point to the relevance of reintegration of people with SCI into the workforce. Further international comparative research using larger samples is recommended.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the quality of life (QoL) of people with spinal cord injury (SCI) across six countries worldwide, controlling for socio-demographic and lesion-related sample characteristics and using a cross-culturally valid assessment.
METHODS: Data from 243 persons with SCI from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, South Africa and the United States were analyzed. QoL was measured using five satisfaction items from the World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment. Cross-culturally valid, Rasch-transformed scores were used for comparison.
RESULTS: Analysis of variance showed a significant difference in QoL between countries (F=3.938; df=5; P=0.002). Shorter time since injury, no paid employment and living in Brazil were significant predictors of lower QoL, explaining 13% of variance in linear regression. Using multilevel regression with country as higher-order variable, time since injury and paid employment remained significant predictors and explained 18% of variance in QoL. The intraclass correlation coefficient (0.05) indicates that 5% of the variability can be accounted for by country.
CONCLUSION: This study showed QoL differences between countries that could not be explained by differences in demographic and lesion-related characteristics. Results point to the relevance of reintegration of people with SCI into the workforce. Further international comparative research using larger samples is recommended.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app