Use of assistive devices - A reality full of contradictions in elderly persons' everyday life

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

Volumn 2, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 335-345

  Häggblom Kronlöf, Greta ^a   Sonn, Ulla ^a,b  

^a Institute of Medicine   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

assistive technology; experiences; Longitudinal retrospective population study; usage rate; very old

Indexed keywords

AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SELF HELP;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SELF-HELP DEVICES;

EID: 63349105999     PISSN: 17483107     EISSN: 17483115     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17483100701701672     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Sonn U, Grimby G, Svanborg A. Activities of daily living studied longitudinally between 70 and 76 years of age. Disabil Rehabil 1996;18:91-100.
2. Spillman BC. Changes in elderly disability rates and the implications for health care utilization and cost. The Millbank Quarterly 2004;82:157-194.
3. Bondevik M, Skogstad A. The oldest old and personal activities of daily living. Scand J Caring Sci 1995;9:219-226.
4. Lawton MP, Nahemow L. Ecology and the aging process. In: Eisdorfer C, Lawton MP, editors. The psychology of adult development and aging. Washington, DC: America Psychology Association; 1973.
5. Cook AM, Hussey SM. Assistive technologies: Principles and practice. 2nd ed, St Louise: Mosby; 2002.
6. Townsend E, editor. Enabling occupation: An occupational therapy perspective. Ottawa: CAOT Publications ACE; 1997.
7. Janlöv A-C, Hallberg IR, Petersson K. The experience of older people of entering into the phase of asking for public home help-a qualitative study. Int J Soc Welfare 2005; 14:326-336.
8. Agree EM, Freedman VA. Incorporating assistive devices into community-based long-term care. J Aging Health 2000; 12:426-450.
9. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF; 2001. Accessed 10 October 2006 at the website: http://www3.who.int/icf/icftemplate.cfm
10. Agree EM. The influence of personal care and assistive devices on the measurement of disability. Soc Sci Med 1999;48:427-443.
11. Hartke RJ, Proshaska TR, Furner SE. Adults and assistive devices. Use, multiple-device use and need. J Aging Health 1998;10:99-116.
12. Hastings Kraskowsky L, Finlayson M. Factors affecting older adults' use of adaptive equipment: Review of the literature. Am J Occup Ther 2001;55:303-310.
13. De Crean AJM, Westendorp RGJ, Willems CG, Buskens ICM, Gussekloo J. Assistive devices and community-based services among 85-year-old community-dwelling elderly in The Netherlands: Ownership, use, and need for intervention. Disabil Rehabil: Ass Tech 2006;1:199-203.
14. Lö fquist C, Nygren C, Széman Z, Iwarsson S. Assistive devices among very old people in five European countries. Scan J Occup Ther 2005;12:181-192.
15. Sonn U, Grimby G. Assistive devices in an elderly population studied at 70 and 76 years of age. Disabil Rehabil 1994;16: 85-92.
16. Dahlin Ivanoff S, Sonn U. Changes in the use of assistive devices among 90-year-old persons. Aging Clin Exp Res 2005;17:246-251.
17. Pettersson I, Berndtsson I, Appleros P, Ahlström G. Lifeworld perspectives on assistive devices: lived experiences of spouses of persons with stroke. Scan J Occup Ther 2005;12: 159-169.
18. Mann WC, Ottenbacher KJ, Fraas L, Tomita M, Granger CV. Effectiveness of assistive technology and environmental interventions in maintaining independence and reducing home care costs for the frail elderly. Arch Fam Med 1999; 8:210-217.
19. Lansley P, McCreadie C, Tinker A. Can adapting to homes of older people and providing assistive technology pay its way? Age Ageing 2004;33:571-576.
20. Bateni H, Maki BE. Review article. Assistive devices for balance and mobility: benefits, demands and adverse consequences. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:134-145.
21. Brandt A° , Iwarsson I, Sta°hl A. Satisfaction with rollators among community-living users: A follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:343-353.
22. Roelands M, Van Oost P, Buysse A, Depoorter AM. Awareness among community-dwelling elderly of assistive devices for mobility and self-care and attitudes towards their use. Soc Sci Med 2002;54:1441-1451.
23. Häggblom-Kronlö f G, Sonn U. Elderly women's way of relating to assistive devices. Tech Disabil 1999;10:161-168.
24. Hart D, Bowling A, Ellis M, Silman A. Locomotor disability in very elderly people: value of a programme for screening and provision of aids for daily living. BMJ 1990; 301:216-220.
25. Hoening H, Taylor DH, Sloan FA. Does assistive technology substitute for personal assistance among the disabled elderly? Am J Pub Health 2003;93:330-337.
26. Mann WC, Llanes C, Justiss MD, Tomita M. Frail older adults' self-report of their most important assistive devices. OTJR: Occupat Participat Health 2004;24:4-12.
27. Agahi N, Lagergren M, Thorslund M, Wa°nell S-E. Hälsoutveckling och hälsofrämjande insatser pa° äldre dar. En kunskapssammanställning. [Health development and health promoting efforts in old age. A literature review] Statens Folkhälsoinstitut R 2005:6, Stockholm.
28. Larsson Lund M, Nyga°rd L. Incorporating or resisting assistive devices: Different approaches to achieving a desired occupational self-image. OTJR: Occupat Participat Health 2003;23:67-75.
29. Fänge A, Iwarsson S. Accessibility and usability in housing: Construct validity and implications for research and practice. Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:1316-1325.
30. Rowe JW, Kahn RL. The structure of successful aging. In: Rowe JW, Kahn RL, editors. Successful aging, New York: Pantheon books; 1998. pp 36-58.
31. Copolillo AE. Use of mobility devices: The decision-making process of nine african-american older adults. Occup Ther J Res 2001;21:185-200.
32. McMillen A-M, Sö derberg S. Disabled persons' experience of dependence on assistive devices. Scan J Occup Ther 2002; 2:176-183.
33. Pape L-B, Kim J, Weiner B. The shaping of individual meanings assigned to assistive technology: A review of personal factors. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:5-20.
34. Gitlin LN, Luborsky MR, Schemm RL. Emerging concerns of older stroke patients about assistive devices use. Gerontologist 1998;38:169-180.
35. Hocking C. Function or feelings: Factors in abandonment of assistive devices. Tech Disabil 1999;11:3-11.
36. Sonn U, Davega°rdh H, Lindskog A-C, Steen B. The use and effectiveness of assistive devices in an elderly urban population. Aging Clin Exp Res 1996;8:176-182.
37. Mann WC, Goodall S, Justiss MD, TomitaM. Dissatisfaction and non use of assistive devices among frail elders. Ass Technol 2002;14:130-139.
38. Eriksson BG, Mellström D, Svanborg A. Medical-social intervention in a 70-year-old Swedish population. A general presentation of methodological experience. Comp Gerontol 1987;1:49-56.
39. Svanborg A. A medical-social intervention in a 70-year-old Swedish population: Is it possible to postpone functional decline in ageing? J Gerontol 1993;48:84-88.
40. Steen B, editor. To become old. The Gerontological and geriatric population studies in Gö teborg, Sweden (H70) 1971-2002. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at Göteborg University; 2004.
41. Sonn U, Hulter A° sberg K. Assessment of activities of daily living in the elderly. A study of a population of 76-year-olds in Gothenburg, Sweden. Scand J Rehab Med 1991;23: 193-202.
42. Sonn U. Longitudinal studies of dependence in daily life activities among elderly persons. Scand J Rehab Med (Suppl.) 1996;34:1-35.
43. Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall; 1991.
44. Malterud K. Kvalitativa metoder i medicinsk forskning [Qualitative methods in medical research]. Lund: Studentlitteratur; 1998.
45. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004;24: 105-112.
46. Edwards NI, Jones DA. Ownership and use of assistive devices among older people in the community. Age Aging 1998;27:463-468.
47. Nyga°rd L. Dagliga livets aktiviteter [Everyday activities]. Va°rdalinstitutets Tematiska rum: Demens; 2004. Accessed 11 January 2007 from the website: http://www.vardalinstitutet.net/documentarchive/1168/1575/ 1576/3214/4133.pdf?objectId1/4 7329
48. Ö stlund B. Gammal är äldst. En studie av teknik i äldre människors liv [Elderly are oldest-a study of technology in elderly peoples everyday life]. Dissertation, Linköping University, Linköping; 1995.
49. Lawton MP. Future society and technology. In: Graafmans J, Taipale V, Charness N, editors. Gerontechnology. A sustainable investment in the future. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1998. pp 12-22.
50. Ö stlund B, Stark A, Hagberg JE, Lorentzon P, Hedqvist T. Teknik fö r hela livet-Ä ldres behov, teknikers och marknaders utveckling. In: Ä ldre politik fö r framtiden. 100 steg till trygghet och utveckling med en a°ldrande befolkning. Del 2 [Technique for all ages-the needs of the elderly, development of techniques and markets. In: Future policy for care of the elderly. 100 steps towards security and development with an ageing population. Part 2]. SOU 2003:91. Accessed 11 January 2007 from the website: http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c4/26/11/fb2a57b1.pdf
51. Mann WC. Assistive technology and older adults. OT Practice 2001;21:13-15.
52. Jensen L. User perspective on assistive technology in daily life. A qualitative analysis of 55 letters from citizens applying for assistive technology. Master thesis, Queen Margaret University College, Occupational Therapy & Art Therapy, Edinburgh; 2005.
53. Hedberg-Kristensson E. Experiences of participation in the prescription process and use of mobility devices in old age. Leic thesis, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University; 2006.
54. Dahlin-Ivanoff S, Iwarsson S, Sonn U. Occupational therapy research on assistive technology and physical environmental issues-a literature review. Can J Occup Ther 2003; 73:109-119.
55. Law M, Cooper B, Strong S, Stewart D, Rigby P, Letts L. The persons-environment-occupation model: A transactive approach to occupational performance. Can J Occup Ther 1996;6:9-23.
56. Hovbrandt P, Fridlund B, Carlsson G. Very old peoples' experiences of occupational performance outside the home: Possibilities and limitations. Scand J Occup Ther 2007; 14:77-85.
57. Valdemarsson M, Jernryd E, Iwarsson S. Preferences and frequencies of visits to public facilities in old age-a pilot study in a Swedish town center. Arch Gerontl Geriat 2005; 40:15-28.
58. Lupton D, Seymour W. Technology, selfhood and physical disability. Soc Sci Med 2000;50:1851-1862.
59. Scherer M. Importance of assistive technology outcomes; 2002. Accessed 3 October 2006 from the website: http://www. e-bility.com/articles/at.php
60. Peterson DB, Murray GC. Ethics and assistive technology service provision. Disabil Rehabil: Ass Tech 2006;1:59-67.
61. Brewer J, Hunter A. Multimethod research. A synthesis of styles. Newbury Park, CA: Saga Publications; 1989.
62. Conneeley AL. Methodological issues in qualitative research for the researcher/practitioner. Br J Occup Ther 2002;65: 185-190.