Wheelchair use among community-dwelling older adults: Prevalence and risk factors in a national sample

Canadian Journal on Aging

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 191-198

  Clarke, Philippa ^a   Colantonio, Angela ^b  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Aging; Assistive technology; Community; Disability; Wheelchair

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; COMMUNITY CARE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREVALENCE; RISK FACTOR; SELF CARE; SELF EVALUATION; SEX DIFFERENCE; WHEELCHAIR;

EID: 23844468400     PISSN: 07149808     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/cja.2005.0059     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Allen, S.M., Foster, A., & Berg, K. (2001). Receiving help at home: The interplay of human and technological assistance. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 56B, S374-S382.
2. Andersen, R.M., & Newman, J. (1973). Societal and individual determinants of medical care utilization in the United States. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 51, 95-124.
3. Canadian Study of Health and Aging Working Group. (1994). Canadian Study of Health and Aging: Study methods and prevalence of dementia. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 150, 899-913.
4. Fillenbaum, G.G. (1988). Multidimensional functional assessment of older adults: The Duke older Americans resources and services procedures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
5. Gitlin, L.N., Schemm, R.L., Landsberg, L., & Burgh, D. (1996). Factors predicting assistive device use in the home by older people following rehabilitation. Journal of Aging and Health, 8, 554-575.
6. Hartke, R.J., Prohaska, T.R., & Furner, S.E. (1998). Older adults and assistive devices: Use, multiple-device use, and need. Journal of Aging and Health, 10, 99-116.
7. Hoenig, H., Pieper, C., Zolkewitz, M., Schenkman, M., & Branch, L.G. (2002). Wheelchair users are not necessarily wheelchair bound. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 50, 645-654.
8. Hoenig, H., Taylor, D.H., & Sloan, F.A. (2003). Does assistive technology substitute for personal assistance among the disabled elderly? American Journal of Public Health, 93, 330-337.
9. Kaye, H.S., Kang, T., & LaPlante, M.P. (2000). Mobility device use in the United States. Disability statistics report (No. 14). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
10. LaPlante, M.P., Hendershot, G.E., & Moss, A.J. (1992). Assistive technology devices and home accessibility features: Prevalence, payment, need, and trends. Advance data from vital and health statistics (No. 217). Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.
11. Mathieson, K.M., Kronenfeld, J.J., & Keith, V.M. (2002). Maintaining functional independence in elderly adults: The roles of health status and financial resources in predicting home modifications and use of mobility equipment. Gerontologist, 42, 24-31.
12. Penning, M.J., & Strain, L.A. (1994). Gender differences in disability, assistance, and subjective well-being in later life. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 49, S202-S208.
13. Roelands, M., Van Oost, P., Depoorter, A., & Buysse, A. (2002). A social-cognitive model to predict the use of assistive devices for mobility and self-care in elderly people. Gerontologist, 42, 39-50.
14. Russell, J.N., Hendershot, G.E., LeClere, F., Howie, J.F., & Adler, M. (1997). Trends and differential use of assistive technology devices: United States, 1994. Advance data from vital and health statistics (No. 292). Hyattsville, MD: National Centre for Health Statistics.
15. Shields, M. (2004). Use of wheelchairs and other mobility support devices. Health Reports, 15, 37-41.
16. Statistics Canada. (2003). Disability supports in Canada, 2001-tables: Participation and activity limitation survey, 2001 (Statistics Canada catalogue no. 89-581-X1E). Ottawa: Minister of Industry, 2003. Retrieved March 20, 2005, from http://www.statcan.ca:8096/ bsolc/english/bsolc?catno=89-581-X&CHROPG= 1.
17. Stewart, A.L., Greenfield, S., Hays, R.D., Wells, K., Rogers, W.H., Berry, S.D., McGlynn, E.A., & Ware, J.E. (1989). Functional status and well-being of patients with chronic conditions: Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Journal of the American Medical Association, 262, 907-913.
18. Teng, E.L., & Chui, H.C. (1987). The modified mini-mental state (3MS) examination. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 48, 314-318.
19. Tomita, M., Mann, W., Fraas, L., & Burns, L. (1997). Racial difference of frail elders in assistive technology. Assistive Technology, 9, 140-151.
20. Tomita, M.R., Mann, W.C., Fraas, L.F., & Stanton, K.M. (2004). Predictors of the use of assistive devices that address physical impairments among community-based frail elders. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 23, 141-155.
21. Verbrugge, L.M., Rennert, C., & Madans, J.H. (1997). The great efficacy of personal and equipment assistance in reducing disability. American Journal of Public Health, 87, 384-392.
22. Yang, J.J., Mann, W.C., Nochajski, S., & Tomita, M.R. (1997). Use of assistive devices among elders with cognitive impairment: A follow-up study. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, 13, 13-31.
23. Zimmer, Z., & Chappell, N. (1994). Mobility restriction and the use of devices among seniors. Journal of Aging and Health, 6, 185-208.