A pilot study of functional access to public buildings and facilities for persons with impairments

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 280-289

  Thapar, Neela ^a   Warner, Grace ^b   Drainoni, Mari Lynn ^a,b   Williams, Steve R ^c   Ditchfield, Holly ^c   Wierbicky, Jane ^c   Nesathurai, Shanker ^a,c  

^a BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b CHQOER   (United States)

^c BOSTON MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARCHITECTURAL BARRIER; ARTICLE; BUILDING; CASE REPORT; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; MALE; MOTOR DYSFUNCTION; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATIENT MOBILITY; PATIENT TRANSPORT; PILOT STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REHABILITATION MEDICINE; TASK PERFORMANCE; UNITED STATES; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT; WHEELCHAIR;

ADULT; ARCHITECTURAL ACCESSIBILITY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DATA COLLECTION; DISABLED PERSONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PILOT PROJECTS; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; WHEELCHAIRS;

EID: 1642485987     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09638280310001649543     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Brandt EN, Pope AM. Enabling America: Assessing the Role of Rehabilitation Science and Engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997.
2. Patla AE, Shumway-Cook A. Dimensions of Mobility: Defining the Complexity and Difficulty Associated with Community Mobility. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity 1999; 7: 7-19.
3. Jette AM. Physical disablement concepts for physical therapy research and practice. Physical Therapy 1994; 74: 380-386.
4. Satariano WA. Editorial: The Disabilities of Aging - Looking to the Physical Environment. American Journal of Public Health 1997; 87: 331-332.
5. Imrie R, Wells P. Planning and disability: Creating a barrier-free environment. Town and Country Planning 1992; 61: 278-280.
6. Pope AM, Tarlov AR (eds) Disability in America: Toward a National Agenda for Prevention. Washington, DC: National Academy, 1991.
7. Department of Education. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Correction for Final Long-Range Plan for Fiscal Years 1999-2003; Notice. 1999; 64.
8. World Health Organization (WHO). International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2001.
9. World Health Organization. ICIDH-2: International Classification of Functioning and Disability. Beta-2 draft, Full version. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1999.
10. Dahl TH. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: An Introduction and Discussion of its Potential Impact on Rehabilitation Services and Research. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2002; 34: 201-204.
11. National Council on Disability. Achieving Independence: The Challenge of the 21st Century, A Decade of Progress in Disability Policy, Setting and Agenda for the Future. National Council on Disability, Washington, DC, 1996.
12. Smith A (ed). Americans with Disabilities Act: ADA Compliance Guide. Tampa, Florida: Thompson Publishing Group, 1999.
13. Silverstein R. Federal Disability Policy Framework Reflecting the Nation's Goals Relating to People with Disabilities as Articulated in the Americans with Disabilities Act. The George Washington University Medical Center, Center for the Study and Advancement of Disability Policy, Washington, DC, 1999.
14. American National Standards Institute Inc. Specifications for Making Buildings and Facilities Accessible to, and Usable by, the Physically Handicapped, Approved Oct 31. New York, 1961.
15. American National Standards Institute Inc. American national standard specifications for making buildings and facilities accessible to, and usable by, the physically handicapped. Author, New York, 1980.
16. American National Standards Institute. Making Buildings and Facilities Accessible to and Usable by the Physically Handicapped. New York, 1961, reaffirmed in 1971.
17. General Services Administration DoD, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Postal Service. Uniform federal accessibility standards. 1984; 49: 31529-31624.
18. Office of Compliance. Section 210 - Congressional Accountability Act: Report on Inspections For Compliance With The Public Access Provisions In the Americans With Disabilities Act.
19. GAO. Americans With Disabilities Act: Initial Accessibility Good But Important Barriers Remain. 1993.
20. GAO. Americans with Disabilities Act - Effects of the Law on Access to Goods and Services. Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Select Education and Civil Rights, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, 1994.
21. Louis Harris and Associates Inc. N.O.D./Harris Survey of Americans with Disabilities. Commissioned by the National Organization of Disability, New York, 1998.
22. McClain L, Cram A, Wood J, Taylor M, Taylor ??. Wheelchair Accessibility - Living the Experience: Function in the Community. The Occupational Therapy Journal of Research 1998; 18: 25-43.
23. Martin LM. Wheelchair accessibility of Public Buildings in Utica, New York. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 1987; 41: 217-221.
24. McClain L, Beringer D, Kuhnert H, et al. Restaurant wheelchair accessibility. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 1993; 47: 619-623.
25. McClain L, Todd C. Food store accessibility. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 1990; 44: 487-491.
26. Ahn HC, McGovern EE, Walk EE, Edlich RF. Architectural barriers to persons with disabilities in businesses in an urban community. J Burn Care Rehabil 1994; 15: 176-179.
27. Grabois EW, Nosek MA, Rossi DC. Accessibility of primary care physicians offices for people with disabilities: An analysis of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Archives Family Medicine 1999; 8: 44-51.
28. Rose KA. A survey of accessibility to chiropractic clinics to the disabled. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological therapeutics 1999; 22: 523-529.
29. Lavery I, Davey S, Woodside A, Ewart K. The vital role of street design and management in reducing barriers to older people's mobility. Landscape and Urban Planning 1996; 35: 181-192.
30. Golledge RG. Geography and the disabled: A survey with special reference to vision impaired and blind populations. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 1993; 18: 63-85.
31. Golledge RG. Human wayfinding and cognitive maps. In: Golledge RG (ed) Wayfinding Behavior: Cognitive Mapping and Other Spatial Processes. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press, 1999; 1-45.
32. Loomis JM, Kalatzky R, Golledge RG, Cicinelli JG, Pellegrino JW, Fry PA. Nonvisual navigation by the blind and sighted: Assessment of path integration ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1993; 122: 73-91.
33. Marston JR, Golledge RG. Improving Transit Access for the Blind and Vision Impaired http://www.ucei.berkeley.edu/PATH/Research/Featured/1098/ Featured10-98.html. Intellimotion; 7.2.
34. Phillips JM. Overcoming distance as a barrier. In: Crewe NM, Zola IK (eds) Independent Living for Physically Disabled People. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass, 1983; 113-119.
35. Cope JG, Allred LJ, Morsell JM. Signs as deterrents of illegal parking in spaces designated for individuals with physical disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1991; 24: 59-63.
36. Thapar N. Changing Activity Spaces of Persons with Multiple Sclerosis. Geography. Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, 1999.
37. Barrier Free Environments Inc, Adaptive Environments Center Inc. Checklist for Existing Facilities Version 2.1. 1995.
38. Chard G, Couch R. Access to higher education for the disabled student: A building survey at the University of Liverpool. Disability and Society 1998; 13: 603-623.
39. Fange A, Iwarsson S, Persson A. Accessibility to the public environment as perceived by teenagers with functional limitations in a south Swedish twon centre. Disability and Rehabilitation 2002; 24: 318-326.
40. Kahana E. A Conguence model of person-environment interaction. In: Lawton MP, Windley P, Byerts T (eds) Aging and the environment: Theretical approaches. New York: Springer, 1982; 97-121.
41. Lawton MP, Windley PG, Byerts TO (eds) Aging and the Environment: Theoretical Approaches. New York: Springer, 1982.
42. Lawton MP. Environmental taxonomy: Generalizations from research with older adults. In: Friedman SL, Wachs TD (eds) Measuring Environment Across the Life Span: Emerging Methods and Concepts. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1999; 91-124.
43. Gärling T. Introductions - conceptualizations of human environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology 1998; 18: 69-73.
44. Moos RH. Specialized living environments for older people: A conceptual framework for evaluation. Journal of Social Issues 1980; 36: 75-94.
45. Wachs TD. Celebrating complexity: Conceptualization and assessment of the environment. In: Friedman SL, Wachs TD (eds) Measuring Environment Across the Life Span: Environment Emerging Methods and Concepts. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1999; 357-392.
46. Altman I, Rogoff B. World views in psychology. Handbook of Environmental psychology. New York: Wiley, 1987; 7-40.
47. Kaplan S. A model of person-environment compatability. Environment and Behavior 1983; 15: 311-332.
48. Dunning H. Environmental Occupational Therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 1972; 26: 292-298.
49. Law M, Cooper B, Strong S, Stewart D, Rigby P, Letts L. The Person-Environment-Occupation Model: A Transactive Approach to Occupational Performance. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 1996; 63: 9-23.
50. Letts L, Law M, Rigby P, Cooper B, Stewart D, Strong S. Person-environment assessments in Occupational Therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 1994; 48: 608-618.
51. Norris-Baker C, Willems EP. Environmental Negotiability as a direct measurement of behavior-environment relationships: Some implications for theory and practice. In: Seidel AD, Danford S (eds) Environmental Design: Research, Theory and Application. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA 10). Washington, DC: Environmental Design Research Association, 1979; 209-214.
52. Useh U, Moyo AM, Munyonga E. Wheelchair accessibility of public buildings in the central business district of Harare Zimbabwe. Disability and Rehabilitation 2001; 23: 490-496.
53. Whiteneck G, Charlifue S, Gerhart KA, Overholser J, Richardson G. Quantifying handicap: A new measure of long-term rehabilitation outcomes. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation 1992; 73: 519-526.
54. Whiteneck GC, et al. Craig Hospital Inventory of Environmental Factors, Version 1. Instrument and Scoring Manual from Authors. Craig Hospital, 3425 South Clarkson St., Englewood, CO 80110 (303-789-8202), 2000.
55. US Access Board. Americans with Disabilities Act: Accessbility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG). Washington, DC, 1998.
56. Gray DB, Hendershot GE. The ICIDH-2: Developments for a new era of outcomes research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2000; 81: S10-S14.
57. Richards JMJ. Units of Analysis and the individual differences fallacy in environmental research. Environment and Behavior 1990; 22: 307-319.
58. Richards JM. Units of Analysis, Measurement Theory, and Environmental Assessment: A Response and Clarification. Environment and Behavior 1996; 28: 220-236.
59. Levine DW. True scores, error, reliability, and unit of analysis in environment and behavior research. Environment and Behavior 1994; 26: 261-293.
60. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine, 1967.