Evaluation of a non-invasive vocal cord vibration switch as an alternative access pathway for an individual with hypotonic cerebral palsy – a case study

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 69-78

  Chan, Julie ^a   Falk, Tiago H ^a   Teachman, Gail ^a   Morin Mckee, Jennifer ^a   Chau, Tom ^a  

^a University of Toronto   (Canada)

Author keywords

aided communication; augmentative and alternative communication (AAC); computer access; vocalization response; Voice switch

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CASE REPORT; CEREBRAL PALSY; DISABLED PERSON; EQUIPMENT; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EVALUATION; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOTHERAPY; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; SELF HELP; TASK PERFORMANCE; VIBRATION; VOCAL CORD;

CEREBRAL PALSY; DISABLED PERSONS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT SAFETY; HUMANS; MALE; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; QUALITY OF LIFE; SELF-HELP DEVICES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; VIBRATION; VOCAL CORDS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77449145344     PISSN: 17483107     EISSN: 17483115     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/17483100903278107     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Statistics Canada – Social and Aboriginal Statistics Division. Participation and activity limitation survey 2006: Analytical report. Ottawa, ON: Ministry of Industry; Dec 2007. 89-628-XIE. 38. Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/bsolc/olc-cel/olc-cel?catno=89-628-X&lang=eng
2. National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities. Internet. Electronic Citation. http://www.nichcy.org/Disabilities/Specific/Pages/SpeechLanguageImpairments.aspx. Last accessed April 2009. Washington, DC: NICHCY.
3. Lancioni GE, Singh NN, O'Reilly MF, Oliva D. Some recent research efforts on microswitches for persons with multiple disabilities. J Child Family Studies 2003; 12: 251–256.
4. DiCarlo CF, Banajee M. Using voice output devices to increase initiations of young children with disabilities. J Early Interv 2000; 23: 191–199.
5. Romski MA, Sevcik R, Adamson LB, Cheslock M. Toddlers, parent-implemented augmented language interventions, and communication development. Paper presented at the biennial conference of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication; Dusseldorf, Germany; 2006.
6. Light J, Drager K. AAC technologies for young children with complex communication needs: State of the science and future research directions. Augment Altern Commun 2007; 23: 204–216.
7. Sevcik RA, Romski MA, Adamson LB. Measuring AAC interventions for individuals with severe developmental disabilities. Augment Altern Commun 1999; 15: 38–44.
8. Light J, Drager K. Improving the design of augmentative and alternative communication technologies for young children. Assist Technol 2002; 14: 17–32.
9. Blackstone S, Williams M, Wilkins D. Key principles underlying research and practice in AAC. Augment Altern Commun 2007; 23: 191–203.
10. Higginbotham JD, Shane H, Russell S, Caves K. Access to AAC: Present, past, and future. Augment Altern Commun 2007; 23: 243–257.
11. Pennington L, Marshall J, Goldbart J. Describing participants in AAC research and their communicative environments: Guidelines for research and practice. Disabil Rehabil 2007; 29: 521–535.
12. Lancioni GE, Singh NN, O'Reilly MF, Sigafoos J, Green V, Chiapparino C, Stasolla F, Oliva D. A voice-detecting sensor and a scanning keyboard emulator to support word writing by two boys with extensive motor disabilities. Res Develop Disabil 2009; 30: 203–209.
13. Lancioni GE, Lems S. Using a microswitch for vocalization responses with persons with multiple disabilities. Rehabil Eng 2001; 23: 745–748.
14. Chang A, Karnell MP. Perceived phonatory effort and phonation threshold pressure across a prolonged voice loading task: A study of vocal fatigue. J Voice 2004; 18: 454–466.
15. Lund SK, Light J. Long-term outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Part III – contributing factors. Augment Altern Commun 2007; 23: 323–325.
16. Smith MM, Connolly I. Roles of aided communication: Perspectives of adults who use AAC. Disabil Rehabil: Assist Technol 2008; 3: 260–273.
17. Long T, Huang L, Woodbridge M, Woolverton M, Minkel J. Integrating assistive technology into an outcome-driven model of service delivery. Infants Young Children 2003; 16: 272–283.
18. Lund SK, Light J. Long-term outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Part I – what is a “good” outcome. Augment Altern Commun 2006; 22: 284–299.
19. Words+. Internet. Electronic Citation. http://www.words-plus.com/website/products/input/istswtch.htm. Last accessed March 2009. Lancaster, CA: Simulations Plus.
20. WiViK. Internet. Electronic Citation. http://www.wivik.com/. Last accessed April 2009. Toronto, ON: Bloorview Kids Rehab.
21. Harada S, Wobbrock J, Landay J, Malkin J, Bilmes J. Longitudinal study of people learning to use continuous voice-based cursor control. In: Proceeding of the Conference in Human Factors in Computing Systems; 2009.
22. Lancioni G, Singh N, O'Reilly M, Oliva D, Groeneweg J. Enabling a girl with multiple disabilities to control her favourite stimuli through vocalization and a dual-microphone microswitch. J Vis Impair Blind 2005; 99: 133–140.
23. Wilson KG. The Columbia guide to standard American English. New York: Columbia University Press; 1993.
24. Baken RJ. Clinical measurement of speech and voice. London: Taylor and Francis Ltd; 1987.
25. Talkin D. A robust algorithm for pitch tracking (RAPT). In: Kleijn WB, Paliwal KK, editors. Speech coding and synthesis. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1995. pp 495–518.
26. Scherer MJ. Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life. Disabil Rehabil 1996; 18: 439–448.
27. Scherer MJ, Sax C, Vanbiervliet A, Cushman LA, Scherer JV. Predictors of assistive technology use: The importance of personal and psychosocial factors. Disabil Rehabil 2005; 27: 1321–1331.
28. Scherer MJ. The change in emphasis from people to person: Introduction to the special issue on assistive technology. Disabil Rehabil 2002; 24: 1–4.
29. AutoHotkey. Internet. 2009. Electronic Citation. http://www.autohotkey.com/. Last accessed April 2009.
30. Borg G. Borg's Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales. Stockholm: Human Kinetics; 1998.
31. Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology QUEST 2.0 – An outcome measure for assistive technology devices. Webster (NY): Institute for Matching Person and Technology, 2000.
32. Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. The Quebec User satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST 2.0): An overview and recent progress. Technol Disabil 2002; 14: 101–105.
33. Felce D, Perry J. Quality of life: Its definition and measurement. Res Develop Disabil 1995; 16: 51–74.
34. Yorkston KM, Beukelman DR, Strand EA, Bell KR. Laryngeal function. In: Yorkston KM, Beukelman DR, Strand EA, Bell KR. Management of motor speech disorders in children and adults. 2nd ed. Texas: Pro-ed; 1999. pp 327–358.