Methods for the selection of assistive technology in neurological rehabilitation practice

Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 308-318

  Friederich, Anja ^a   Bernd, Tanja ^a   De Witte, Luc ^a  

^a Vilans   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Assistive device; Assistive technology; Disability and Health (ICF); Instrument; International Classification of Functioning; Model; Neurological rehabilitation; Provision; Service delivery process; Standard Classification ISO 9999

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HUMAN; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SELF HELP;

EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HUMANS; NERVOUS SYSTEM DISEASES; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; QUESTIONNAIRES; SELF-HELP DEVICES;

EID: 77954896531     PISSN: 11038128     EISSN: 16512014     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/11038120903377082     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Gladman JRF, Radford KA, Edmans JA, Sach T, Parry R, Walker M, Sackley CM, Lincoln NB. NHS service delivery organisation, specialist rehabilitation for neurological conditions: Literature review and mapping study. Publication 52413. 2007.
2. Hoenig H, Landerman LR, Shipp KM, Pieper C, Richardson M, Pahel N, et al. A clinical trial of a rehabilitation expert clinician versus usual care for providing manual wheelchairs. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005;53:1712-20.
3. Arthanat S, Lenker J. Evaluating the ICF as a framework for clinical assessment of persons for assistive technology device recommendation. 10th North American Collaborating Centre Conference on ICF; 2004 1-4 June; Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. [updated 2004; cited 24 March 2008]. Available from: http://cihi.ca/cihiweb/en/downloads/SajayArthanat-pa-per.pdf.
4. Parker M, de Witte L, Johnson I. Improving service delivery systems for assistive technology\a European strategy [pamphlet]. 1st ed. Sains A, editor. European Commission. Stockholm: Svensk tryck; 1995.
5. United Nations. Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities [online], Article 26-Habilitation and Rehabilitation [updated 2006; cited 29 March 2008]. Available from: http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id-286.
6. Elola J, Daponte A, Navarro V. Health indicators and the organization of health care systems in Western Europe. Am J Public Health [serial online] October 1995 [cited 12 March 2008];85(10):1397-1401. Available from: http://www.pub-medcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi? artid = 1615621&pageindex = 5#page
7. Commission of the European Communities. De Witte L, Knaps H, Pyfers L, Röben P, Johnson I, Andrich R, et al, editors. HEART/Horizontal European Activities in Rehabilitation Technology. European service delivery systems in rehabilitation technology. Hoensbroek (The Netherlands): IRV; 1994.
8. Gbe-bund.de [homepage on the Internet]. Bonn: Statis-tisches Bundesamt (Federal Statistical Office), Federal Health Monitoring; c2008-03 [cited 10 March 2008] Available from: http://www.gbe-bund.de/gbe10/pkg-isgbe5. prc-isgbe?p-uid = gast&p-aid = 84983463&p-sprache = E.
9. International Organization for Standardization. International Standard ISO 9999: 2007(E) Assistive products for persons with disability\Classification and terminology. 4th ed. Geneva: ISO Copyright Office; 2007.
10. Fuhrer MJ. Assistive technology outcomes research: Challenges met and yet unmet. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2001;80:528-35.
11. Bernd T, Van Der Pijl D, De Witte LP. Existing models and instruments for the selection of assistive technology in rehabilitation practice. Scand J Occup Ther 2009;16:146.
12. World Health Organization [online]. ICF: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (English full version) [updated 15 June 2001; cited 3 May 2008]. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/site/ onlinebrowser/icf.cfm.
13. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research, principles and methods. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004.
14. Mosey AC. Occupational therapy: The configuration of a profession. New York: Raven Press; 1981. p. 154.
15. Foster M. Theoretical frameworks. In: Turner A, Foster M, Johnson S, editors. Occupational therapy and physical dysfunction. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1997. p. 27-59.
16. Who.int [homepage on the Internet]. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision (ICD-10). Version for 2007. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/ icd10online/.
17. Hse.ie [homepage on the Internet]. The Health Service Executive [updated 1 May 2007; cited 9 April 2008]. Available from: http://www.hse.ie/eng/Find-a- Service/Hospitals/.
18. Irishheart.ie [homepage on the Internet]. Dublin: Irish Heart Foundation, National Audit of Stroke Care, Organizational Audit: Hospital Services 2006 [cited 9 April 2008]. Available from: http://www.irishheart.ie/iopen24/ defaultarticle.php? cArticlePath = 38-224.
19. Revalidatie.nl [homepage on the Internet]. Revalidatie Nederland [cited 9 April 2008]. Available from: http://www.revalidatie.nl/
20. Federal Statistical Office of Germany: Verzeichnis der Krankenhäuser und der Vorsorge-oder Rehabilitationsein-richtungen 31 December 2005; published March 2007.
21. Rehakompass.oebig.at [homepage on the Internet]. Wien: ÖBIG Forschungs-und Planungsgesellschaft mbH, Öster-reichischer Rehabilitationskompass [cited 10 April, 2008]. Available from: http://rehakompass.oebig.at/Suche/Sucher-gebnis.aspx?bl = B&bl = K&bl = NO&bl = OO&bl = S&bl = St&bl = T&bl = V&bl = W&in = NEU.
22. Msc.es [homepage on the Internet]. Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo-Health Services and Centres, Catalogo Nacional de Hospitales, 2008 [updated 31 December 2007; cited 14 April]. Available from: http://www.msc.es/en/ciudadanos/ prestaciones/centrosServiciosSNS/hospitales/home.htm.
23. Carf.org [homepage on the Internet]. CARF Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities, International Report: Accreditation Status Summary Report c2008 [cited 18 April 2008]. Available from: http://www.carf.org/.
24. Enothe.hva.nl [homepage on the Internet]. European Network of Occupational Therapy in Higher Education. [cited 11 May 2008]. Available from: http://www.enothe.hva.nl/index.html.
25. Department of Occupational Therapy. Uniting practice and theory in an occupational framework. Am J Occup Ther 1998;52:509-21. PMID: 9693695.
26. Cook AM, Hussey SM. Assistive technologies, principles and practice. 2nd ed. St Louis: Mosby; 2002.
27. Kielhofner G. Model of Human Occupation. 3rd ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
28. Townsend E, Stanton S, Law M, Polatajko M, Baptiste S, Thompson-Franson T, et al. Enabling occupation: An occupational therapy perspective. Revised ed. Ottawa, CAOT Publications ACE; 2002.
29. Duncan EAS, editor. Foundations for practice in occupational therapy. 4th ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2006.
30. Pedritti LW. Occupational therapy: Practice skills for physical dysfunction. 4th ed. St Louis: Mosby; 1996.
31. Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists [homepage on the Internet]. Ottawa: CAOT; c2003-2008 [cited 30 July, 2008]. Canadian Occupational Performance Measure [about 5 screens]. Available from: http://www.caot.ca/copm/ index.html.
32. Occupationalperformance.com [homepage on the Internet]. Occupational Performance Model (Australia); [cited 30 July 2008]. Available from: http://www.occupationalperfor-mance.com/index.php/au/home/assessments/prpp/ the-per ceive-recall-plan-perform-prpp-system-of-task-analysis.
33. Occupationalperformance.com [homepage on the Internet]. Occupational Performance Model (Australia) [cited 30 July]. Available from: http://www.occupationalperformance.com/index.php/au/home.
34. Fisher AG, Liu Y,Velozo CA, Pan AW. Cross-cultural assessment of process skills. Am J Occup Ther 1992;46:876-85.
35. Kiresuk T, Sherman R. Goal attainment scaling: A general measure of evaluating comprehensive mental health programs. Community Ment Health J 1968;4:443-53.
36. Iwarsson S. The Housing Enabler: An objective tool for assessing accessibility. Br J Occup Ther 1999;62:491-7.
37. Wilson B, Cockburn J, Baddeley A, Hiorns R. The development and validation of a test battery for detecting and monitoring everyday memory problems. J Clin Exper Neu-ropsychol 1989;11:855-70.
38. Tbims.org [homepage on the Internet].Wright J. The FIM (TM). The Center for Outcome Measurement in Brain Injury; c1998-2006 [cited 26 June, 2008]. Available from: http://www.tbims.org/combi/FIM.
39. Linacre JM, Heinemann AW, Wright BD, Granger CV, Hamilton BB. The structure and stability of the Functional Independence Measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75: 127-32.
40. Sørensen HV, Lendal S, Schultz-Larsen K, Uhrskov T. Stroke rehabilitation: Assistive technology devices and environmental modifications following primary rehabilitation in hospital\a therapeutic perspective. Assist Technol 2003;15: 39-48.
41. Phillips B, Zhao H. Predictors of assistive technology abandonment. Asst Technol 1993;5:36-45.
42. Scherer MJ, Jutai J, Fuhrer M, Demers L, DeRuyter F. A framework for modelling the selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs). Disabil Rehabil Assist Techn 2007;2: 1-8.
43. Scherer MJ, Glueckauf R. Assessing the benefits of assistive technology for activities and participation. Rehab Psychol 2005;50:132-41.
44. Deutsche Vereinigung für Rehabilitation (DVfR). Für eine optimierte Versorgung mit Hilfsmitteln. Eine Expertise der Deutschen Vereinigung für Rehabilitation zu aktuellen Problemen bei der Versorgung mit Hilfs-mitteln [Optimizing provision of assistive technology. Expert opinion of the German Society for Rehabilitation, DVfR, on current issues in the provision of technical aids and assistive devices]. Rehabil (Stuttg). 2007, 46; 175-86.
45. Hubert M. Die Praxis der Bedarfsermittlung zur Hilfsmit-telversorgung in den Niederlanden [The practice of needs assessment for the supply of technical aids in the Netherlands]. Rehabil (Stuttg) 2003;42:52-9.
46. Smith RO, Jansen CJ, Seitz J, Longenecker Rust K. ATOMS Project Technical Report: The ICF in the context of assistive technology (AT) interventions and outcome. [updated August 2006; cited 21 August 2008]. Available from: http://www.r2d2.uwm.edu/atoms/archive/icf.html.
47. Lenker JA, Paquet V. A review of conceptual models for assistive technology outcomes research and practice. Asst Technol 2003;15:1-15.
48. Lenker JA, Jutai J. Assistive technology outcomes research and clinical practice: What role for ICF? [updated 2002; cited 21 August 2008]. Available from: http://www.cihi.ca/cihiweb/en/downloads/icf-jun02-papers-6A-e.pdf.
49. Scherer MJ. Matching person & technology: A series of assessments for evaluating predispositions to and outcomes of technology use in rehabilitation, education, the workplace & other settings. Rev. ed. Webster, NY: Institute for Matching Person & Technology; 1998.
50. Copley J, Ziviani J. Use of a team-based approach to assistive technology assessment and planning for children with multiple disabilities: A pilot study. Asst Technol 2007;19:109-25.
51. MURINET European project [Online] [cited 3 January 2008]. Available from: http://www.headnetgroup.it/muri-net.asp.