Predictors of assistive technology use: The importance of personal and psychosocial factors

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 27, Issue 21, 2005, Pages 1321-1331

  Scherer, Marcia J ^a   Sax, Caren ^b   Vanbiervliet, Alan ^c   Cushman, Laura A ^d   Scherer, John V ^a  

^a Institute for Matching Person and Technology   (United States)

^b SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Assistive technology; Evidence based practice; Impact; Outcomes research; Personality; Prediction; Quality of life

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CONSUMER; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; GENDER; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; MOOD; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PATIENT COUNSELING; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF ESTEEM; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; VALIDATION PROCESS; VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION;

DISABLED PERSONS; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF-HELP DEVICES;

EID: 29244478299     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: 14645165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09638280500164800     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. DeRuyter, F. The importance of outcome measures for assistive technology service delivery systems Technology and Disability, 1997; 6: 89-104
2. Fuhrer, MJ. Assistive Technology outcomes research: Challenges met and yet unmet American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2001; 80: 528-535
3. Jutai, J, Ladak, N, Schuller, R, Naumann, S, Wright, V. Outcomes measurement of assistive technologies: An institutional case study Assistive Technology, 1996; 8.2: 110-120
4. Wielandt, T, Strong, J. Compliance with prescribed adaptive equipment: A literature review British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2000; 63: 65-75
5. Scherer, MJ. Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life Disability and Rehabilitation, 1996; 18: 439-448
6. Day, H, Jutai, J, Woolrich, W, Strong, G. The stability of impact of assistive devices Disability and Rehabilitation, 2001; 23: 400-404
7. Scherer, MJ. Assistive Technology: Matching Device and Consumer for Successful Rehabilitation 2002; (Ed.)
8. Scherer, MJ. Living in the State of Stuck: How Technology Impacts the Lives of People with Disabilities, Fourth Edition 2005
9. Lenker, JA, Paquet, VL. A review of conceptual models for assistive technology outcomes research and practice Assistive Technology, 2003; 15: 1-15
10. Lenker, JA, Paquet, VL. A new conceptual model for assistive technology outcomes research and practice Assistive Technology, 2004; 16: 1-10
11. Fuhrer, MJ, Jutai, JW, Scherer, MJ, DeRuyter, F. A framework for the conceptual modelling of assistive technology device outcomes Disability and Rehabilitation, 2003; 25: 1243-1251
12. Scherer, MJ, Coombs, FK, Merbitz, NH. Garbage in, garbage out: The importance of initial assessments in achieving successful assistive technology outcomes American Occupational Therapy Association Technology Special Interest Section Quarterly, 2004 March; 14: 1-4
13. Cook, A, Hussey, S. Assistive Technologies: Principles and Practice, Second Edition 2002
14. Pape, TL-B, Kim, J, Weiner, B. The shaping of individual meanings assigned to assistive technology: A review of personal factors Disability and Rehabilitation, 2002; 24: 5-20
15. Olkin, R. What psychotherapists should know about disability 1999
16. Iezzoni, LI. When Walking Fails, Mobility Problems of Adults with Chronic Conditions 2003
17. Gray, DB, Quatrano, LA, Lieberman, ML. Designing and Using Assistive Technology: The Human Perspective 1998; (Eds.)
18. Scherer, MJ. Connecting to Learn: Educational and Assistive Technology for People with Disabilities 2004
19. Scherer, MJ. The change in emphasis from people to person: Introduction to the special issue on Assistive Technology Disability & Rehabilitation, 2002; 24: 1-4
20. Parette, HP, Huer, MB, Scherer, M. Effects of Acculturation on Assistive Technology Service Delivery Journal of Special Education Technology, 2004; 9: 31-41 Also available on-line at http://jset.unlv.edu/19.2/ parette/first.html
21. VanBiervliet, A, Parette, HP. Families, cultures, and AAC [CD-ROM] 1999
22. Scherer, MJ. The Matching Person & Technology (MPT) Model Manual, third edition 1998
23. Scherer, MJ, Cushman, LA. Measuring subjective quality of life following spinal cord injury: A validation study of the Assistive Technology Device Predisposition Assessment Disability & Rehabilitation, 2001; 23: 387-393
24. Scherer, MJ, Cushman, LA. Predicting satisfaction with assistive technology for a sample of adults with new spinal cord injuries Psychological Reports, 2000; 87: 981-987
25. Scherer, MJ, Craddock, G. Matching Person & Technology (MPT) assessment process Technology & Disability, Special Issue: The assessment of Assistive Technology Outcomes, Effects and Costs, 2002; 14: 125-131
26. Kilgore, KL, Scherer, M, Bobblitt, R, Dettloff, J, Dombrowski, DM, Godbold, N, Jatich, JW, Morris, R, Penko, JS, Schremp, ES, Cash, LA. Neuroprosthesis consumers' forum: Consumer priorities for research directions Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 2001; 38: 655-660
27. Scherer, MJ, Cushman, LA. Determining the content for an interactive training programme and interpretive guidelines for the Assistive Technology Device Predisposition Assessment Disability & Rehabilitation, 2002; 24: 126-130
28. World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health,. Retrieved 11 October 2004 from http://www3.who.int/icf/ icftemplate.cfm?myurl=homepage.html&mytitle=Home%20Page.
29. Scherer, MJ, Cushman, LA, Federici, S. Measuring Participation and the Disability Experience with the "Assistive Technology Device Predisposition Assessment". Paper Presentation, 2004, June 2. Advancing a Research Agenda for ICF: 10th North American Collaborating Center (NACC) Conference on ICF, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. [http://www.icfconference.com/downloads/Marcia_Scherer.pdf]
30. Arthanat, S, Lenker, J. Evaluating the ICF as a Framework for Clinical Assessment of Persons for Assistive Technology Device Recommendation Paper Presentation, 2004, June 2. Advancing a Research Agenda for ICF: 10th North American Collaborating Center (NACC) Conference on ICF, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. [http://www.icfconference.com/downloads/ Sajay_Arthanat.pdf]
31. Council on Rehabilitation Education (CORE), Accreditation manual 1997; Retreived October 2004 from http://www.core-rehab.org
32. Sax, C. Assistive technology online instruction: Expanding the dimensions of learning communities Assistive technology: Matching device and consumer for successful rehabilitation, 2002; pp. 213-227 In Scherer MJ, editor
33. Sax, C. Assistive technology education: An online model for rehabilitation professionals Disability and Rehabilitation, 2002; 24: 144-151
34. Tooth, L, Ottenbacher, K. The use of Kappa in rehabilitation research Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2004; 85: 1371-1376