• Alejandro García-Rudolph, Joan Saurí, Blanca Cegarra, Eloy Opisso, Josep María Tormos, Dietmar Frey, Vince Istvan Madai, and Montserrat Bernabeu.
• Department of Research and Innovation, Institut Guttmann, Institut Universitari de Neurorehabilitació adscrit a la UAB, Badalona, Barcelona, Spain.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Feb 25; 101 (8): e28695.

AbstractCompare community integration of people with stroke or traumatic brain injury (TBI) living in the community before and during the coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 disease (COVID-19) when stratifying by injury: participants with stroke (G1) and with TBI (G2); by functional independence in activities of daily living: independent (G3) and dependent (G4); by age: participants younger than 54 (G5) and older than 54 (G6); and by gender: female (G7) and male (G8) participants.Prospective observational cohort studyIn-person follow-up visits (before COVID-19 outbreak) to a rehabilitation hospital in Spain and on-line during COVID-19.Community dwelling adults (≥18 years) with chronic stroke or TBI.Community integration questionnaire (CIQ) the total-CIQ as well as the subscale domains (ie, home-CIQ, social-CIQ, productivity CIQ) were compared before and during COVID-19 using the Wilcoxon ranked test or paired t test when appropriate reporting Cohen effect sizes (d). The functional independence measure was used to assess functional independence in activities of daily living.Two hundred four participants, 51.4% with stroke and 48.6% with TBI assessed on-line between June 2020 and April 2021 were compared to their own in-person assessments performed before COVID-19.When analyzing total-CIQ, G1 (d = -0.231), G2 (d = -0.240), G3 (d = -0.285), G5 (d = -0.276), G6 (d = -0.199), G7 (d = -0.245), and G8 (d = -0.210) significantly decreased their scores during COVID-19, meanwhile G4 was the only group with no significant differences before and during COVID-19.In productivity-CIQ, G1 (d = -0.197), G4 (d = -0.215), G6 (d = -0.300), and G8 (d = -0.210) significantly increased their scores, meanwhile no significant differences were observed in G2, G3, G5, and G7.In social-CIQ, all groups significantly decreased their scores: G1 (d = -0.348), G2 (d = -0.372), G3 (d = -0.437), G4 (d = -0.253), G5 (d = -0.394), G6 (d = -0.319), G7 (d = -0.355), and G8 (d = -0.365).In home-CIQ only G6 (d = -0.229) significantly decreased, no significant differences were observed in any of the other groups.The largest effect sizes were observed in total-CIQ for G3, in productivity-CIQ for G6, in social-CIQ for G3 and in home-CIQ for G6 (medium effect sizes).Stratifying participants by injury, functionality, age or gender allowed identifying specific CIQ subtotals where remote support may be provided addressing them.Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

24 keywords...

hide…