Flow chart showing selection of participants in the survey, responders and non-responders.
Table 1. Comparison of basal characteristics in responders and non-responders.
ItemsResponders (n = 822)Non-responders (n = 905)p-valueAge in years, mean (95% CI)70.6 (69.7–71.5)69.4 (68.4–70.4)Sex, n (%)Men401 (49%)448 (50%)0.765Women421 (51%)457 (50%)Previous stroke, n (%)Yes249 (31%)263 (30%)0.510No550 (69%)623 (70%)Living conditions three months after stroke, n (%)Living alone309 (38%)449 (51%)< 0.001Cohabitant460 (56%)438 (49%)
Table 2. Disability and self-perceived health in responders 12–28 months after stroke.
QuestionResponse alternativesn (%)Do you have any of theImpaired mobility795 (97%) following disabilities?Difficulties in understanding or interpreting information185 (23%)Impaired vision151 (18%)Impaired hearing108 (13%)Other203 (25%)How is your physical mobility?Can transfer without assistance of another person indoors and outdoors216 (26%)Can transfer without assistance of another person indoors but not outdoors239 (29%)Need assistance by another person for all transfers335 (41%)No response32 (4%)Do you use a walking aidNo walking aid80 (10%) or wheelchair?Walking stick/crutches180 (22%)Walker260 (32%)Manual wheelchair411 (50%)Electric wheelchair124 (15%)How do you assess yourVery good24 (3%) general health?Rather good411 (50%)Rather poor258 (31%)Very poor70 (9%)Do not know/no response59 (8%)
Figure 2.
Proportion of disabled stroke survivors that had used different modes of public transport on at least one occasion in the last year, by place of living.Notes: p-values calculated using Fisher's exact test; ns, non-significant.
Table 3. Number and proportions of stroke survivors using public transport who reported problems when travelling.
Travel elementBus (n = 166)Train (n = 72)Air (n = 108)Ship (n = 99)Information (e.g., time schedules, prices), n (%)17 (11%)6 (9%)11 (10%)5 (5%)Booking or buying ticket, n (%)17 (11%)7 (10%)9 (9%)7 (7%)Information in terminal (or bus stop), n (%)22 (14%)16 (24%)10 (10%)a8 (8%)aEmbarking and disembarking, n (%)49 (27%)17 (25%)29 (27%)18 (18%)bMoving on board, n (%)59 (38%)28 (42%)40 (39%)26 (26%)Personal service, n (%)22 (14%)10 (15%)7 (7%)10 (10%)Notes: ap<0.05 vs. train (Fisher's exact test); bp<0.05 vs. bus.
Table 4. Anticipated constraints to travelling reported by stroke survivors who had not travelled.
Anticipated constraintsBus (n = 368)Train (n = 250)Air (n = 252)Ship (n = 229)Physical constraintsTransfer to and from public transport310 (84%)205 (82%)155 (62%)a184 (80%)Embarking and/or disembarking325 (88%)201 (80%)152 (60%)b165 (72%)cCognitive and emotional constraintsBooking and payment129 (35%)92 (37%)72 (29%)67 (29%)Orientation problems149 (40%)108 (43%)80 (32%)88 (38%)Fear66 (18%)44 (18%)42 (17%)42 (18%)Other88 (24%)48 (19%)50 (20%)42 (18%)Do not know15 (4%)15 (6%)22 (9%)15 (7%)Notes: Data are presented as n (%); ap < 0.0001 vs. bus, train and ship (Fisher's exact test); bp<0.001 vs. bus and train; cp<0.05 vs. bus and train.
Table 5. Suggested areas of improvement in response to open-ended questions.
DomainSuggested areas of improvementBusTrainAirShipPhysical/technicalImproved embarking/disembarking, various suggestions+++++++++++Better possibilities to bring wheelchair on board (e.g. ramp)+++++++0More space at handicap seats (or cabins)++++++++++Handicap toilets++++++++ServiceMore assistance by staff, including help with luggage+++++++++Reduced pace++00+InformationImproved information on handicap seats, access to ramps and possibility to get assistance0+++++Simpler booking system0+0+Notes: +++, frequently suggested; ++, moderate number of suggestions; +, occasionally suggested; 0 no responses.
