Skip to main content
Log in

A comparison of health status between rural and urban adults

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Community Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of the study was to examine and compare health status between rural and urban adults. The data are from a 1993 statewide probability-based telephone survey of adult Kentuckians (n=662). Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) residents (n=264) and nonMSA residents (n=398) were compared using the Medical Outcomes Study, Short Form Health Survey (SF-20). Self-perceived urban (n=406) and rural (n=256) residents were also compared. Additional analyses were stratified by the age categories of 18–44, 45–64, and ≥65 years of age. Few differences in health status existed between rural and urban adults. However, rural elders (≥65 years) had significantly poorer health status than urban elders. After controlling for demographic variables in multiple regressions, rural elders had significantly poorer functioning (all p<.05) than urban elders as measured by the SF-20 subscales of a) physical functioning, b) role functioning, c) social functioning, d) general mental health, and e) general health perceptions. No differences between rural and urban residents were noted for the pain subscale. Although the health status of rural and urban adults is generally similar, the rural elderly have significantly worse health status than their urban counterparts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Office of Program Development.Study of Models to Meet Rural Health Care Needs. Rockville, MD: Health Resources and Service Administration, 1992. Publication No. HRS 240-89-0037.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kletke PR, Marder WD, Willke RJ. A projection of the primary care physician population in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas.Primary Care Research: Theory and Methods. AHCPR conference proceedings, Washington DC: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 1991:261–269.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Van Nostrand JF, ed. Common beliefs about the rural elderly: what do national data tell us?Vital Health Stat 3; 1993.

  4. Feldstein PJ.Health Care Economics. Third Edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1988:76–109.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ware JE, Manning WG, Duan N, Wells KB, Newhouse JP. Health status and the use of outpatient mental health services.Am Psychol. 1984;39:1090–1100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bergner L, Hallstrom AP, Bergner M, Eisenberg MS, Cobb LA. Health status of survivors of cardiac arrest and of myocardial infarction controls.Am J Public Health. 1985;75:1321–1323.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Norton CH, McManus MA. Background tables on demographic characteristics, health status, and health services utilization.Health Serv Res. 1989;23:725–755.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dwyer JW, Barton AJ, Vogel WB. Area of residence and risk of institutionalization.J. Gerontol. 1994;49:S75-S84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gillanders WR, Buss TF. Access to medical care among the elderly in rural northeastern Ohio.J Fam Pract. 1993;37:349–355.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Data Watch. Study: rural elders living alone at greater risk for health problems.Hosp Health Netw. 1993 Sep 20:67:58.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Waksberg J. Sampling methods for random digit dialing.J Am Stat Assoc. 1978;73:40–6.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sudman S. Applied sampling. In: Rossi PH, Wright JD, Anderson AB, eds.Handbook of Survey Research. New York: Academic Press; 1983:145–94.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rosenblatt RA. Summary and reactions: rural health manpower research.Primary Care Research: Theory and Methods. AHCPR conference proceedings, Washington DC: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 1991:271–275.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE. The MOS short form general health survey: reliability and validity in a patient population.Med Care. 1988;26:724–735.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stewart AL, Greenfield S, Hays RD, et al. Functional status and well-being of patients with chronic conditions: results from the Medical Outcomes Study.JAMA. 1989;262:907–913.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ware JE. How to score the SF-20.Memorandum released to users of the Medical Outcomes Study 20-Item Short-Form Health Survey. Boston, MA: New England Medical Center, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mangione CM, Marcantonio ER, Goldman L, et al. Influence of age on measurement of health status in patients undergoing elective surgery.J Am Geriatr Soc. 1993;41:377–383.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kristal AR, White E, Davis JR, et al. Effects of enhanced calling efforts on response rates, estimates of health behavior, and costs in a telephone health survey using random-digit dialing.Public Health Rep. 1993;108:372–379.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Marcus AC, Crane LA. Telephone surveys in public health research.Med Care. 1986;24:97–112.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Corey CR, Freeman HE. Use of telephone interviewing in health care research.Health Serv Res. 1990;25:129–144.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mainous, A.G., Kohrs, F.P. A comparison of health status between rural and urban adults. J Community Health 20, 423–431 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02260438

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02260438

Keywords

Navigation