Technology and the environment: Supportive resource or barrier for people with developmental disabilities?

Nursing Clinics of North America

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 331-349

  Hammel, Joy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNITY CARE; DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER; EDUCATION PROGRAM; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; HUMAN; INSURANCE; MEDICAID; MEDICARE; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; REVIEW; VOCATIONAL EDUCATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; DISABLED PERSON; ENVIRONMENT; LEGAL ASPECT; MENTAL DEFICIENCY; NURSING; SELF HELP; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES; DISABLED PERSONS; ENVIRONMENT; HUMANS; MENTAL RETARDATION; SELF-HELP DEVICES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0041825186     PISSN: 00296465     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0029-6465(02)00053-1     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Hammel J., Lai J., Heller T. The impact of assistive technology and environmental interventions on function and living situation status for people who are aging with developmental disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 24:(1-3):2002;93-105
2. The Assistive Technology Act: PL 105-394. 1998;Congressional Report, Washington DC
3. Lawton M.P. Competence, environmental press and the adaptation of older people. Powell Lawton M., Windley P.G., Byerts T.O. Aging and the environment. 1982;Springer, New York
4. Dunn W., Brown C., McGuigan A. The ecology of human performance: a framework for considering the effect of context. Am J Occup Ther. 48:(7):1994;595-607
5. Hammel J, Heller T, Ying G. Outcomes of assistive technology services and use by adults with developmental disabilities. Proceedings of the Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America. Minneapolis, MN; 1998.
6. Light J.C., Binger C. Building communicative competence with individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication. 1998;Paul H. Brookes, Baltimore, MD
7. McEwen I. Assistive positioning as a control parameter of social-communicative interactions between students with profound multiple disabilities and classroom staff. Phys Ther. 72:(9):1992;634-647
8. Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000: PL 106-402. 2000;Congressional Report, Washington, DC
9. The Rehabilitation Act: PL 99-506. 1973;Congressional Report, Washington, DC. (Amendments 1998)
10. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990: PL 101-336. 1990;Congressional Report, Washington, DC
11. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: PL 105-17. 1998;Congressional Report, Washington, DC
12. Olmstead v L.C., 98 SCt 536 (1999).
13. LaPlante M., Hendershot G., Moss A. Assistive technology devices and home accessibility features: prevalence, payment, need and trends. Advance data: number 217. 1992;National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control, Washington, DC
14. National Council on Disability. Federal policy barriers to assistive technology. 2000;Author, Washington, DC
15. Seelman K. Blueprint for the millennium: an analysis of regional hearings on assistive technology for people with disabilities. 1998;US Department of Education, NIDRR, Washington, DC
16. Gitlin L. Why older people accept or reject assistive technology. Generations. Spring:1995;41-46
17. Philips B., Zhao H. Predictors of assistive technology abandonment. Assist Technol. 5:1993;36-45
18. Wehmeyer M. National survey of the use of assistive technology by adults with mental retardation. Ment Retard. 36:(1):1998;44-51
19. Parette H., Vanbiervliet A. Tentative findings of a study of the technology needs and use patterns of persons with mental retardation. J Intellect Disabil Res. 36:1992;7-27
20. Connolly B.H. General effects of aging on persons with developmental disabilities. Top Geriatr Rehabil. 13:(3):1998;1-18
21. Benz M., Kennann K. Educational experiences, needs, and interests of older adults with mental retardation. Educ Gerontol. 14:1988;509-523
22. Nochajski S., Tomita M., Mann W. The use and satisfaction with assistive devices by older persons with cognitive impairments: a pilot intervention study. Top Geriatr Rehabil. 12:(2):1996;40-53
23. French S. What's so great about independence? Swain J., Finkelstein V., French S., Oliver M. Disabling barriers - enabling environments. 1993;Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
24. Morris J. Independent lives: community care and disabled people. 1993;Macmillan Press, Basingstoke, Great Britain
25. Reindal S. Independence, dependence, interdependence: some reflections on the subject and personal autonomy. Disabil Soc. 14:(3):1999;353-367
26. Hammel J. Assistive technology and environmental intervention (AT-EI) impact on activity and life roles of aging adults with developmental disabilities: findings and implications for practice. J Occup Phys Ther Geriatr. 18:(1):2000;37-58
27. Hammel J. Assistive technology and practice. 2000;American Occupational and Therapy Association, Bethesda, MD
28. Heller T. Supporting adults with intellectual disabilities and their families in planning and advocacy: a literature review. Phys Occup Ther Geriatr. 18:(1):2000;59-74