User satisfaction with mobility assistive devices: An important element in the rehabilitation process

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 30, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 551-558

  Samuelsson, Kersti ^a   Wressle, Ewa ^a  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Evaluation; Manual wheelchair; QUEST 2.0; Rollator

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOBILIZATION; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPIST; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSIOTHERAPIST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; REHABILITATION CARE; SAFETY; WALKING AID; WHEELCHAIR;

ADULT; AGED; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; WHEELCHAIRS;

EID: 41449106549     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: 14645165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09638280701355777     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Ward, D. E. (1994) Prescribing seating for wheeled mobility. Theory, application, and terminology, Health Wealth International, Kansas City, KS
2. Aminzadeh, F. and Edwards, N. (2000) Factors associated with cane use among community dwelling older adults. Publ Health Nurs, 17, pp. 474-483.
3. Roelands, M., Van Oos, P., Buysse, A. and Depoorter, A. M. (2002) Awareness among community-dwelling elderly of assistive devices of mobility and self-care and attitudes towards their use. Soc Sci Med, 54, pp. 1441-1451.
4. Yeomans, S. G. (2000) The clinical application of outcomes assessment, Appleton & Lange, Stamford, CT
5. Fuhrer, M. Assistive technology outcomes research: Impressions of an interested newcomer. Paper presented at the International Conference on Outcome Assessment in Assistive Technology Oslo, Norway
6. Swedish Handicap Institute (2000) Förskrivningsprocessen för hjälpmedel till personer med funktionshinder, Hjälpmedelsinstitutet, Vällingby, Sweden
7. Swedish Handicap Institute (2001) QUEST 2.0 - ett utvärderingsinstrument för hjälpmedel, Hjälpmedelsinsitutet, Vällingby, Sweden
8. Demers, L., Weiss-Lambrou, R. and Ska, B. (1996) The Queec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology: QUEST. Assist Technol, 8, pp. 3-13.
9. Wessels, R. D. and De Witte, L. P. (2003) Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of QUEST 2.0 with users of various types of assistive devices. Disabil Rehabil, 25, pp. 267-272.
10. Demers, L., Monette, M., Lapierre, Y., Arnold, D. L. and Wolfson, C. (2002) Reliability, validity and applicability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with Multiple Sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil, 24, pp. 21-30.
11. Demers, L., Wessels, R., Weiss-Lambrou, R., Ska, B. and De Witte, L. P. (2001) Key dimensions of client satisfaction with assistive technology: a cross-validation of a Canadian measure in the Netherlands. J Rehabil Med, 33, pp. 187-191.
12. Demers, L., Weiss-Lambrou, R. and Ska, B. (2000) Item analysis of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST). Assist Technol, 12, pp. 96-105.
13. Demers, L., Wessels, R. D., Weiss-Lambrou, R., Ska, B. and De Witte, L. P. (1999) An international content validation of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction and Assistive Technology (QUEST). Occup Ther Int, 6, pp. 159-175.
14. Wressle, E. and Samuelsson, K. (2004) User satisfaction with mobility assistive devices. Scand J Occup Ther, 11, pp. 143-150.
15. Scherer, M. J. (1998) The impact of assistive technology on the lives of people with disabilities. Designing and using assistive technology: The human perspective, Paul H Brooks, Balitmore
16. Benedict, R. E., Lee, J. P., Marrujo, S. K. and Farel, A. M. (1999) Assistive devices as an early childhood intervention: Evaluating outcomes. Technol Disabil, 11, pp. 79-90.
17. Brandt, Å, Iwarsson, S. and Ståhl, A. (2003) Satisfaction with rollators among community-living users: A follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil, 25, pp. 343-353.
18. Edyburn, D. L. and Smith, R. O. (2004) Creating an assistive technology outcomes measurement system: Validating the components. Assist Technol Outcomes and Benefits, 1, pp. 8-15.
19. World Health Organization (WHO) (2001) International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland
20. Lee, K. R. (2002) Where does assistive technology fit in ICIDH-2?. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 81, p. 636.
21. Stineman, M. (2002) Assistive technology outcomes: Commodity or a therapy?. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 81, p. 636.
22. McMillen, A.-M. and Söderberg, S. (2002) Disabled persons' experience of dependence on assistive devices. Scand J Occup Ther, 9, pp. 176-183.
23. Edyburn, D. L. (2003) Measuring assistive technology outcomes: Key concepts. J Special Educ Technol, 18, pp. 53-55.