Abstract
Study design
Mixed-methods.
Objectives
(1) To explore psychosocial and quality of life outcomes between those injured early versus later in life, and (2) to explore their post-injury experiences.
Setting
GF Strong Rehabilitation Centre, Vancouver, Canada.
Methods
For this community-based study, we recruited individuals with SCI (>55 years of age) who were either injured between the ages of 15–30 (n = 15) or after the age of 50 (n = 15). We collected quantitative data about participants’ sociodemographics and participants completed standardised questionnaires assessing personal factors, environmental factors, life habits, and quality of life. An independent samples t test was performed for continuous variables and the Chi-square test was conducted for the categorical variables. Qualitative data were collected via semi-structured interviews. Thematic content analysis was performed on the interview transcripts.
Results
We found no statistically significant differences between the two groups on any of the psychosocial outcomes. However, those injured later in life were significantly more likely to be female, have a higher income, and live in residential care. We identified three main qualitative themes that were consistent across the two groups: ‘dealing with health and changes in occupation’, ‘enacting interdependence’, and ‘living in the community’. Some sub-themes varied between groups.
Conclusions
To facilitate better rehabilitation, clinicians need to be aware of disparities among people with SCI relating to age of injury. Across age cohorts, it is important to increase independence, provide greater support when entering or returning to the workforce, and reduce societal stigma.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
Data availability
Available data are presented within the article.
References
Chen Y, He Y, DeVivo M. Changing demographics and injury profile of new traumatic spinal cord injuries in the United States, 1972–2014. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97:1610–9.
National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center (NSCISC). Complete public version of the 2015 annual statistical report for the spinal cord injury model systems. Birmingham: NSCISC; 2015.
Jackson A, Dijkers M, DeVivo M, Poczatek R. A demographic profile of new traumatic spinal cord injuries: change and stability over 30 years. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1740–8.
Ahn H, Bailey C, Rivers C, Noonan V, Tsai E, Fourney D, et al. Effect of older age on treatment decisions and outcomes among patients with traumatic spinal cord injury. Can Med Assoc J. 2015;187:873–80.
Adriaansen J, Rujis L, van Koppenhagen C, van Asbeck F, Snoek G, van Kuppevelet D, et al. Secondary health conditions and quality of life in persons living with spinal cord injury for at least ten years. J Rehabil Med. 2016;48:853–60.
Noonan V, Fingas M, Farry A, Baxter D, Singh A, Fehlings M, et al. Incidence and prevalence of spinal cord injury in Canada: a national perspective. Neuroepidemiology. 2012;38:219–26.
Hsieh C, DeJong G, Groah S, Ballard P, Horn S, Tian W, et al. Comparing rehabilitation services and outcomes between older and younger people with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:175–86.
Hilton G, Unsworth C, Stuckey R, Murphy G. The experience of seeking, gaining and maintaining employment after traumatic spinal cord injury and the vocational pathways involved. Work.2018;59:67–84.
Charlifue S, Jha A, Lammertse D. Aging with spinal cord injury. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N. Am. 2010;21:383–402.
Fougeyrollas P, Boucher N, Edwards G, Grenier Y, Noreau L. The disability creation process model: a comprehensive explanation of disabling situations as a guide to developing policy and service programs. Scand J Disabil Res. 2019;21:25–37.
Sandelowski M. What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Res Nurs Health. 2009;33:77–84.
Average income explorer [Internet]. Canada Census; 2016 [cited 2019]. Available from: https://censusmapper.ca/maps/1535?index=3#13/49.2782/-123.1338
Anderson R. Thematic Content Analysis (TCA): descriptive presentation of qualitative data. 2007. (Unpublished manuscript).
Lidal I, Huynh T, Biering-Sorensen F. Return to work following spinal cord injury: a review. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;29:1341–75.
Buttigieg S, Illinca S, de Sao Jose J, Larsson A. Researching ageism in health-care and long term care. In: Ayalon L, Tesch-Römer C, editors. Contemporary Perspectives on Ageism. Springer, Cham; 2018. p. 493–515.
Groah S, Charlifue S, Tate D, Jensen M, Molton I, Forchheimer M, et al. Spinal cord injury and aging: challenges and recommendations for future research. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;91:80–93.
McIntyre A, Marrocco S, McRae S, Sleeth L, Hitzig S, Jaglal S, et al. A scoping review of self-management interventions following spinal cord injury. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2020;26:36–63.
Gross Z. How can we overcome the dichotomy that Western culture has created between the concepts of independence and dependence? Educ Philos Theory. 2015;47:1160–5.
Mortenson W, Sixsmith A, Beringer R. No place like home? Surveillance and what home means in old age. Can J Aging. 2016;35:103–14.
Hamamura T, Xu Q, Du Y. Culture, social class, and independence-interdependence: the case of Chinese adolescents. Int J Psychol. 2013;48:344–51.
Gray A. Stigma in psychiatry. J R Soc Med. 2002;95:72–6.
Reed K, Meade M, Krausse J. Impacts of health behaviours and health management on employment after SCI: psychological health and health management. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2016;22:111–20.
Hay-Smith E, Dickson B, Nunnerley J, Sinnott K. “The final piece of the puzzle to fit in”: an interpretive phenomenological analysis of the return to employment in New Zealand after spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;35:1436–46.
Post M, van Leeuwen C. Psychosocial issues in spinal cord injury: a review. Spinal Cord. 2012;50:382–9.
Itzkovich M, Tamir A, Philo O, Steinberg F, Ronen J, Spasser R, et al. Reliability of the Catz-Itzkovich Spinal Cord Independence Measure assessment by interview and comparison with observation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;82:267–72.
Woolrich R, Kennedy P, Tasiemski T. A preliminary psychometric evaluation of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in 963 people living with a spinal cord injury. Psychol Health Med. 2006;11:80–90.
Jette A, Haley S, Coster W, Kooyoomjian J, Levenson S, Heeren T, et al. Late life function and disability instrument: I. development and evaluation of the disability component. J Gerontol. 2002;57:209–16.
Whiteneck G, Harrison-Felix C, Mellick D, Brooks C, Charlifue S, Gerhart K, et al. Quantifying environmental factors: a measure of physical, attitudinal, service, productivity, and policy barriers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1324–35.
Baker P, Bodner E, Allman R. Measuring life-space mobility in community-dwelling older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51:1610–4.
The WHOQOL Group. Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychol Med. 1998;28:551–8.
Funding
Supported by ICORD Seed Grant.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
ES: analysis, writing. BS: conceptualisation, methodology, writing. SF: conceptualisation, methodology, writing. CLB: conceptualisation, methodology, writing. DS: conceptualisation, methodology, writing. MV: investigation, analysis, writing. WBM: conceptualisation, methodology, analysis, investigation, writing, supervision.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Received from the local university Behavioural Research Ethics Board and the health authority (H14-01737).
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Simpson, E., Sawatzky, B., Forwell, S. et al. A mixed-methods study exploring and comparing the experiences of people who sustained a spinal cord injury earlier versus later in life. Spinal Cord 60, 706–711 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-022-00767-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-022-00767-0
This article is cited by
-
Perspectives on factors influencing quality of life in persons with long-term spinal cord injury: a qualitative study
Spinal Cord (2024)
-
Bridges of perspectives: representation of people with lived experience of spinal cord injury in editorial boards and peer review
Research Integrity and Peer Review (2023)
