Users' Perceptions of the Impact of Electronic Aids to Daily Living Throughout the Acquisition Process

Assistive Technology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 63-72

  Ripat, Jacquie ^a   Strock, Anne ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

^b Grace General Hospital   (Canada)

Author keywords

EADL acquisition model; Electronic aids to daily living; Lifestyle performance model; Mixed methods approach; Psychosocial impact of assistive devices scale; Quality of life

Indexed keywords

MATHEMATICAL MODELS; RESEARCH; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

ELECTRONIC AIDS; PSYCHOSOCIAL IMPACT;

ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT;

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPETENCE; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DEVICE; ELECTRONICS; EVALUATION; EXPERIENCE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUALITY OF LIFE; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF CONCEPT; SELF ESTEEM; SOCIAL ASPECT; TECHNIQUE; TECHNOLOGY;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; DISABLED PERSONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIFE STYLE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF EFFICACY; SELF-HELP DEVICES;

EID: 3242712115     PISSN: 10400435     EISSN: 19493614     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10400435.2004.10132075     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Aaronson, N. K., Bullinger, M., & Ahmedzai, S. (1988). A modular approach to quality-of-life assessment in cancer clinical trials. Recent Results in Cancer Research, 111, 231-249.
2. Angelo, J., & Trefler, E. (1998). A survey of persons who use integrated control devices.Assistive Technology, 10, 77-83.
3. Cook, A., & Hussey, S. (2002). Assistive technologies: Principles and practice (2nd ed). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
4. Copolillo, A. E. (2001). Use of mobility devices: The decisionmaking process of nine African-American older adults. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 21, 185-200.
5. Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6. Demers, L., Weiss-Lambrou, R., & Ska, B. (1997). Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST): A new outcome measure. In S. Sprigle (Ed.), Let’s tango: Partnering people and technologies. Proceedings of the RESNA’97 annual conference. Arlington, VA: RESNA.
7. DeRuyter, F. (1995). Evaluating outcomes in assistive technology: Do we understand the commitment? Assistive Technology; 7, 3-8.
8. Electronic and Mechanical Assistive Technologies. (2002). Ziska environmental control unit. Retrieved December 10, 2003, from http://www.hsc.mb.ca/re/catalogue/env-remote.htm
9. Fidler, G. S. (1996). Lifestyle performance: From profile to conceptual model. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 50, 139-147.
10. Galvin, J. C., & Scherer, M. J. (1996). Evaluating, selecting and using appropriate assistive technology. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen.
11. Goodman, G., Tiene, D., & Luft, P. (2002). Adoption of assistive technology for computer access among college students with disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 24, 80-92.
12. Granger, C. V., & Hamilton, B. B. (1993). The uniform data system for medical rehabilitation report of first admissions for 1991. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 12, 33-38.
13. Gryfe, P., & Jutai, J. (1998). Assistive technologies: Clients' perceptions of impact on quality of life. Rehab & Comm unity Care Management, Fall, 26-30.
14. Hinjosa, J., Kramer, P., Royeen, C. B., & Luebben, A. J. (2003). Core concepts of occupation. In: Perspectives in human occupation: Participation in life. P. Kramer, J. Hinojosa, & C. B. Royeen (Eds.), Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.
15. Jutai, J., & Day, H. (2002). Psychosocial impact of assistive devices. Technology and Disability, 14, 107-111.
16. Jutai, J., Rigby, P., Ryan, S., & Stickel, S. (2000). Psychosocial impact of electronic aids to daily living. Assistive Technology, 12, 123-131.
17. Kemp, B. J. (1999). Quality of life while aging with a disability. Assistive Technology, 11, 158-163.
18. Lange, M. (2000). Computer-based EADLs. OT Practice, January, 21-22.
19. Mann, W. C. (1992). The use of environmental control devices by elderly nursing home patients. Assistive Technology, 4, 60-65.
20. Martinko, M. J., Henry, J. W., & Zmud, R. W. (1996). An at-tributional explanation of individual resistance to the introduction of information technologies in the workplace. Behaviour & Information Technology, 15, 313-330.
21. McDowell, I., & Newell, C. (1996). Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
22. Oldridge, N. B. (1996). Outcome measurement: Health-related quality of life. Assistive Technology, 8, 82-93.
23. Phillips, B., & Zhao, H. (1993). Predictors of assistive technology abandonment. Assistive Technology, 5, 36-45.
24. Portney, L. G., & Watkins, M. P. (1993). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Norwalk, CT: Apple-tone & Lange.
25. Sackett, D. L., & Rosenberg, W. M. C. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t [Electronic Version]. British Medical Journal, 312, 71-72. Retrieved October 28, 2003, from http://80-search-epnet-com.proxy2.1ib.umanitoba. ca/direct. asp?an=9601313898&db=by h
26. Scherer, M. (1996). Living in the state of stuck: How technology impacts the lives of people with disabilities. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
27. Spitzer, W. O., Dobson, A. J., & Hall, J. (1981). Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients: A concise QL-index for use by physicians. Journal of Chronic Disability, 34, 585-597.
28. Velde, B., & Fidler, G. (2002). Lifestyle performance: A model for engaging the power of occupation. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK.