Rural-urban differences in informal caregiving and health-related quality of life.

OBJECTIVES: Rural-urban health disparities are pervasive among older adults. Rural US locations have a disproportionately high population of older adults, have reduced access to services, and are therefore more reliant on family and friends for care. However, little is known about rural-urban disparities among the 40+ million informal caregivers nationwide. There is a critical need to understand how rural-urban disparities impact caregiving experiences and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The objectives of this study were to assess rural-urban differences in informal caregiving status, caregiving intensity (caregiving hours/week and types of care provided), and caregiver HRQoL. METHODS: Data were abstracted from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. The primary measure of rural-urban status was "metropolitan status." Associations between rural-urban status and caregiving and rural-urban differences in caregiving intensity and HRQoL were examined using generalized linear models, controlling for confounding and accounting for complex sampling. RESULTS: Rural respondents were more likely to be caregivers than urban respondents (OR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.02-1.34). After adjustment for confounders, rural caregivers were more likely than urban caregivers to provide 20 or more hours of caregiving per week (OR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.07-1.77), although the findings for health and HRQoL were somewhat mixed. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that rural older adults offer more care than urban counterparts, which may have implications for caregiver health, well-being, and quality of life. These results can inform policies designed to improve caregiver health, and facilitate the translation and adaptation of existing policies, programs, and interventions to address rural caregivers' needs.

Availability of Medicaid home- and community-based services for older Americans and people with physical disabilities.

This article provides an overview of Medicaid home- and community-based services (HCBS) for older adults and individuals with physical disabilities by describing eligibility criteria, availability, and types of services. All 50 state Medicaid programs provide supplementary HCBS in addition to mandatory services. The amount, type, and eligibility for HCBS varied widely between states. Variation in service provision and eligibility rules has led to a patchwork of services from state to state, with the same person eligible for services in one state but not another.

Variation in the Presence of Simple Home Modifications of Older Americans: Findings from the National Health and Aging Trends Study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between sociodemographic and economic factors and the presence of simple home modifications (HMs) among older adults in the United States. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: National Health and Aging Trends Study (2011, Round 1). PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling Medicare enrollees aged 65 and older (N = 6,628). MEASUREMENTS: The primary dependent variable was the reported presence or absence of simple HMs (grab bars in the shower or near the toilet, shower seats, raised toilet seats). RESULTS: Of the individuals sampled, 60.7% reported having at least one HM of interest. Black (odds ratio (OR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.68-0.91) and Hispanic (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.45-0.78) respondents were less likely than white, non-Hispanic respondents to have HMs. Those with more education (high school graduate: OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.01-1.42; >high school: OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.14-1.62) and larger social networks (≥4 people; OR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.12-1.89) were more likely to have at least one HM, whereas being divorced (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.43-0.74) was associated with lower likelihood. Income (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.97-1.05), Medicaid enrollment (OR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.77-1.25), and living alone (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.85-1.23) were not significantly associated with the presence of HMs. CONCLUSION: Minorities, individuals with less education, and those with less social support are less likely to have HMs. Awareness of these disparities and the shortcomings of the HM delivery system is important to clinicians and policy-makers who seek to prevent falls and facilitate aging in place for all older Americans.

Advanced upper limb prosthetic devices: implications for upper limb prosthetic rehabilitation.

The number of catastrophic injuries caused by improvised explosive devices in the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars has increased public, legislative, and research attention to upper limb amputation. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has partnered with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and DEKA Integrated Solutions to optimize the function of an advanced prosthetic arm system that will enable greater independence and function. In this special communication, we examine current practices in prosthetic rehabilitation including trends in adoption and use of prosthetic devices, financial considerations, and the role of rehabilitation team members in light of our experiences with a prototype advanced upper limb prosthesis during a VA study to optimize the device. We discuss key challenges in the adoption of advanced prosthetic technology and make recommendations for service provision and use of advanced upper limb prosthetics. Rates of prosthetic rejection are high among upper limb amputees. However, these rates may be reduced with sufficient training by a highly specialized, multidisciplinary team of clinicians, and a focus on patient education and empowerment throughout the rehabilitation process. There are significant challenges emerging that are unique to implementing the use of advanced upper limb prosthetic technology, and a lack of evidence to establish clinical guidelines regarding prosthetic prescription and treatment. Finally, we make recommendations for future research to aid in the identification of best practices and development of policy decisions regarding insurance coverage of prosthetic rehabilitation.