Mobility and mobility-related participation outcomes of powered wheelchair and scooter interventions after 4-months and 1-year use

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 211-218

  Lofqvist C ^a   Pettersson, C ^a   Iwarsson, S ^c   Brandt, A ^b  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b Danish Centre for Assistive Technology   (Denmark)

^c NONE

Author keywords

Assistive devices; Effect; Electric wheelchairs; Mobility devices; NOMO 1.0; Occupational therapy; Rehabilitation

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISABILITY; DISABLED PERSON; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; TIME; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WALKING DIFFICULTY; WHEELCHAIR;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DISABILITY EVALUATION; DISABLED PERSONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOBILITY LIMITATION; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WHEELCHAIRS;

EID: 84859550173     PISSN: 17483107     EISSN: 17483115     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2011.619224     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. United Nations. Standard rules on the equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities. New York United Nations Department of Public Information; 1994.
2. World Health Organization [WHO]. Disability and Rehabilitation Action plan 2006-2011. [cited 2006 Aug 18]; Available at http: //www. who.int/disabilities/
3. Nordic Cooperation on Disability. Provision of assistive technology in the Nordic countries. 2nd Edn. Vällingby: Sweden; Nordic cooperationon disability; 2007.
4. World Health Organization [WHO]. Guidelines on the provision of wheelchairs in less resourced settings 2008 [cited 2011Jan]; Available at: http: //www.who.int/disabilities/publications/technology/wheel chairguidelines/en/ index.html
5. Fuhrer MJ. Assessing the efficacy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of assistive technology interventions for enhancing mobility. DisabilRehabil Assist Technol 2007; 2: 149-158.
6. Auger C, Demers L, Gélinas I, Jutai J, Fuhrer MJ, DeRuyter F. Powered mobility for middle-aged and older adults: Systematic review of outcomesand appraisal of published evidence. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2008; 87: 666-680.
7. Salminen AL, Brandt A, Samuelsson K, Töytäri O, Malmivaara A. Mobility devices to promote activity and participation: A systematic review. J Rehabil Med 2009; 41: 697-706.
8. Hoenig H, Giacobbi P, Levy CE. Methodological challenges confronting researchers of wheeled mobility aids and other assistive technologies. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2007; 2: 159-168.
9. Wessels RD, de Witte L, Andrich R, Ferrario M, Persson J, Oberg B. IPPA, a usercentred approach to assess effectiveness of assistive technology provision. Technol Disabil 2000; 13: 105-115. (Pubitemid 32791400)
10. World Health Organization [WHO]. WHODAS II. [cited 2006 Sept 12] Available at: http: //www.who.int/icidh/whodas/index.html
11. Pettersson I, Ahlström G, Törnquist K. The value of an outdoor powered wheelchair with regard to the quality of life of persons withstroke: A follow-up study. Assist Technol 2007; 19: 143-153. (Pubitemid 47492660)
12. Brandt A, Iwarsson S, Ståhle A. Older people's use of powered wheelchairs for activity and participation. J Rehabil Med 2004; 36: 70-77. (Pubitemid 38401293)
13. Pettersson I, Appelros P, Ahlström G. Lifeworld perspectives utilizing assistive devices: Individuals, lived experience following a stroke. CanJ Occup Ther 2007; 74: 15-26.
14. Davies A, De Souza LH, Frank AO. Changes in the quality of life in severely disabled people following provision of powered indoor/outdoor chairs. Disabil Rehabil 2003; 25: 286-290. (Pubitemid 36285053)
15. Rousseau-Harrison K, Rochette A, Routhier F, Dessureault D, Thibault F, CôtéO. Impact of wheelchair acquisition on social participation. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2009; 4: 344-352.
16. Hjälpmedelsinstitutet. Äldrestatistik 2010. Äldres hälsa, funktionsnedsättning, boende och hjälpmedel [Statistics on old people 2010.Elderlies health, disability, living and assistive devices]. Vällingby: Hjälpmedelsinstitutet; 2010.
17. Brandt Å, Stapelfeldt C. Forbrug af mobilitetshjælpemidler 2002- 2006 ? på basis af data fra Zealand Care [Use of mobility devices 2002-2006 ? based on data from Zealand care]. Århus: Hjæ lpemiddelinstituttet; 2009.
18. Kolomainen U. Sähköisten liikkumisapuvälineiden myöntämiskäytännöt sairaanhoitopiireissa [Provision practices of powered mobility devicesin Finnish hospital districts]. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä2003.
19. Norwegian Labour and Welfare service. Statistics produced by the department of assistive technology NAV. Available from: NAV Oslo: Norway; 2010
20. European Commission [EU]. Access to assistive technology in the European Union. 2003 [cited 2004 Sept]; European Commission, social security and social integration; Available at: http: //ec.europa. eu/employment-social/disability/ assistive-technology-study-en.pdf
21. Nordic Cooperation on Disability. Provision of Assistive Technology in the Nordic Countries. Solna: Nordic cooperation on disability issues (NSH); 2007.
22. Houben PPJ. Changing housing for elderly people and co-ordination issues in Europe. Housing Studies 2001; 16: 651-673. (Pubitemid 32949406)
23. Hvinden B. Nordic disability policies in a changing Europe: Is there still a distinct model? Soc Poli Admin 2004; 38: 179-189.
24. Brandt A, Löfqvist C, Jónsdottir I, Sund T, Salminen AL, Werngren- Elgström M, Iwarsson S. Towards an instrument targeting mobilityrelated participation: Nordic cross-national reliability. J Rehabil Med 2008; 40: 766-772.
25. World Health Organization [WHO]. International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Geneva: WHO; 2001.
26. Kazdin AE. Research Design in Clinical Psychology, Fourth Edn. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2003.
27. Lövdén M, Ghisletta P, Lindenberger U. Social participation attenuates decline in perceptual speed in old and very old age. Psychol Aging2005; 20: 423-434. (Pubitemid 41572547)
28. Kielhofner G. Model of Human Occupation: Theory and application. Fourth Edn. Lippincott: Williams & Wilkins; 2008.
29. Mollenkopf H, Baas S, Marcellini F, Oswald F, Ruoppila I, Szeman a et al. A new concept of out-of-home mobility. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2005.
30. Simonsick EM, Guralnik JM, Volpato S, Balfour J, Fried LP. Just get out the door! Importance of walking outside the home for maintaining mobility: Findings from the women's health and aging study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005; 53: 198-203. (Pubitemid 41632544)
31. Auger C, Demers L, Gélinas I, Miller WC, Jutai JW, Noreau L. Life-space mobility of middle-aged and older adults at various stages of usage of power mobility devices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91: 765-773.
32. Evans S, Frank AO, Neophytou C, de Souza L. Older adults' use of, and satisfaction with, electric powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs. Age Ageing 2007; 36: 431-435. (Pubitemid 47261036)
33. Evans S, Neophytou C, de Souza L, Frank AO. Young people's experiences using electric powered indoor - outdoor wheelchairs (EPIOCs): Potential for enhancing users' development? Disabil Rehabil 2007; 29: 1281-1294. (Pubitemid 47189921)
34. Lawton MP. Competence, environmental press, and the adaptation of older people. In: Lawton MP, Windley PG, Byerts TO, (eds). Aging and Environment: Theoretical Approaches. New York: Springer; 1982. pp 33-59.
35. Wessels RD, de Witte LP, Jedeloo S, van den Heuvel WP, van den Heuvel WJ. Effectiveness of provision of outdoor mobility services and devices in The Netherlands. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18: 371-378. (Pubitemid 38697070)
36. Agree EM, Freedman VA, Sengupta M. Factors influencing the use of mobility technology in community-based long-term care. J Aging Health 2004; 16: 267-307. (Pubitemid 38316358)
37. Ware J, Snow K, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide. Boston (Mass)7 The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993.