Responses to the acquisition and use of power mobility by individuals who have multiple sclerosis and their families

American Journal of Occupational Therapy

Volumn 60, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 348-358

  Boss, Terri M ^a   Finlayson, Marcia ^b  

^a La Grange Area Department of Special Education   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745071525     PISSN: 02729490     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5014/ajot.60.3.348     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Assistive Technology Act of 2004. Pub. L. 108-364.
2. Baum, H., & Rothschild, B. (1983). Multiple sclerosis and mobility restriction. Archive of Physical and Medicine Rehabilitation, 64(12), 591-596.
3. Blake, D., & Bodine, C. (2002). An overview of assistive technology for persons with multiple sclerosis. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 39(2), 299-312.
4. Blustein, J. (1993). The family in medical decision making. Hastings Center Report, 23(3), 6-13.
5. Buning, M., Angelo, J., & Schmeler, M. (2001). Occupational performance and the transition to powered mobility: A pilot study. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55(3), 339-344.
6. Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists. (1997). Enabling occupation: An occupational therapy perspective. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: CAOT Publications ACE.
7. Cockerill, R., & Warren, S. (1990). Care for caregivers: The needs of family members of MS patients. Journal of Rehabilitation, 1, 41-44.
8. Copolillo, A. (2001). Use of mobility devices: The decision-making process of nine African-American older adults. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 21(3) 185-201.
9. Dean, G. (1994). World populations in multiple sclerosis. Neuroepidemiology, 13, 1-7.
10. DePoy, E., & Gitlin, L. (1998). Introduction to research: Understanding and applying multiple strategies (2nd ed.). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
11. Fay, T., & Boninger, M. (2002). The science behind mobility devices for individuals with multiple sclerosis. Medical Engineering & Physics, 24, 375-383.
12. Finlayson, M., & Van Denend, T. (2003). Experiencing the loss of mobility: Perspectives of older adults with MS. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25(20), 1168-1180.
13. Ford, H., Gerry, E., Johnson, M., & Tennant, A.. (2000). Health status and quality of life for people with MS. Disability and Rehabilitation. 23(12), 516-521.
14. Freeman, J. (2001). Improving mobility and functional independence in persons with multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neurology, 248, 255-259.
15. Iezzoni, L. (2003). When walking fails: Mobility problems of adults with chronic conditions. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
16. Joy, J., & Johnston, R. (2001). Multiple sclerosis: current status and strategies for the future. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
17. Kraskowsky, L., & Finlayson, M. (2001). Factors affecting older adults' use of adaptive equipment: Review of the literature. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55(3), 303-310.
18. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Miles-Tapping, C., & MacDonald, L. (1994). Lifestyle implications of power mobility. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics, 12(4), 31-49.
20. Muhr, T. (1998). ATLAS.ti. Berlin: Scientific Software Development.
21. National Multiple Sclerosis Society. (2004). Epidemiology of multiple sclerosis. Retrieved December 5, 2004, from http://www.nmss.org
22. Scherer, M. (1996). Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life. Disability and Rehabilitation, 18(9), 439-448.
23. Schwartz, L., & Kraft, G. (1999). The role of spouse responses to disability and family environment in multiple sclerosis. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 78(6), 525-532.
24. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
25. Wineman, N. (1990) Adaptation to multiple sclerosis: The role of social support, functional disability and perceived uncertainty. Nursing Research, 39(5), 294-299.