Resources search

Background: Environmental factors compound or diminish the effects of impairments; therefore they have a direct influence on participation of stroke survivors.

Objectives: To determine environmental barriers and facilitators to participation experienced by a group of stroke survivors in the Western Cape province of South Africa.

Methods: A descriptive, mixed methods study was conducted in 2011. Quantitative data was collected with the International Classification for Functioning, Disability and Health core set for stroke (environmental factors), from 53 stroke survivors, sampled through proportional, stratified, random sampling. Data is presented through graphs and tables. Qualitative data was collected from five purposively sampled participants and thematically analysed.

Results: Under products and technology, participants regarded assets, food, products and technology for daily living, transportation, mobility and communication, and access to buildings as barriers. The physical geography and attitudes of friends and society created further barriers. With regard to services, systems and policies - housing, communication, transport and social services created barriers. Health services, as well as support from health care service providers and family were considered facilitators.

Conclusion: A lack of assets compounded barriers with regard to food, products for daily use, communication and transport. Barriers to participation were exacerbated by a lack of services, systems and implementation of policies focused on the inclusion of people with disabilities, as well as minimal access to assistive devices. Recommendations include provision of assistive devices, structural changes to houses, yards, roads and buildings, lobbying for accessible, affordable public transport, access audits of public buildings, and inclusion of non-governmental organisations and home-based care services in a seamless network of care.

Background: Wheelchairs provide mobility that can enhance function and community integration. Function in a wheelchair is influenced by wheelchair design.

Objectives: To explore the impact of wheelchair design on user function and the variables that guided wheelchair prescription in the study setting.

Method: A mixed-method, descriptive design using convenience sampling was implemented. Quantitative data were collected from 30 wheelchair users using the functioning every day with a Wheelchair Scale and a Wheelchair Specification Checklist. Qualitative data were collected from ten therapists who prescribed wheelchairs to these users, through interviews. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to identify relationships, and content analysis was undertaken to identify emerging themes in qualitative data.

Results: Wheelchairs with urban designs were issued to 25 (83%) participants. Wheelchair size, fit, support and functional features created challenges concerning transport, operating the wheelchair, performing personal tasks, and indoor and outdoor mobility. Users using wheelchairs designed for use in semi-rural environments achieved significantly better scores regarding the appropriateness of the prescribed wheelchair than those using wheelchairs designed for urban use (p = <0.01). Therapists prescribed the basic, four-wheel folding frame design most often because of a lack of funding, lack of assessment, lack of skills and user choice.

Conclusion: Issuing urban type wheelchairs to users living in rural settings might have a negative effect on users’ functional outcomes. Comprehensive assessments, further training and research, on long term cost and quality of life implications, regarding provision of a suitable wheelchair versus a cheaper less suitable option is recommended.