Experiences of adults with complex communication needs receiving and using low tech AAC: An Australian context

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

Volumn 8, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 392-401

  Iacono, Teresa ^a   Lyon, Katie ^b   Johnson, Hilary ^b   West, Denise ^b  

^a LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b Australia and the Communication Resource Centre   (Australia)

Author keywords

AAC; High technology; Low technology; Service delivery

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; AUSTRALIA; COMMUNICATION AID; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; PATIENT PREFERENCE;

ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE; AUSTRALIA; COMMUNICATION AIDS FOR DISABLED; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; PATIENT PREFERENCE;

EID: 84883570318     PISSN: 17483107     EISSN: 17483115     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2013.769122     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. American Speech-Language Hearing Association. Report: augmentative and alternative communication. Asha 1991;33: 9-12.
2. Iacono T, Lyon K, West D. Non-electronic communication aids for people with complex communication needs. Int J Speech-Language Pathol 2011;13: 399-410.
3. Mirenda P. Toward a functional augmentative and alternative communication for students with autism: manual signs, graphic symbols, and voice output communication aids. Lang Speech Hear Serv Schools 2003;34: 203-16.
4. Wilkinson KM, Hennig S. The state of research and practice in augmentative and alternative communication for children with developmental/intellectual disabilities. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2007;13: 58-69.
5. Hodge S. Why is the potential of augmentative and alternative communication not being realized? Exploring the experiences of people who use communication aids. Disabil Soc 2007;22: 457-71.
6. Blackstone S. Ten US funding programs. Augment Commun News 2006;18: 1-8.
7. Hamm B, Mirenda P. Post-school quality of life for individuals with developmental disabilities who use AAC. Augment Altern Commun 2006;22: 134-47.
8. Iacono T. The evidence base in augmentative and alternative communication. In: Reilly S, Perry A, Douglas J, eds. Evidence-based practice in speech pathology. London: Wiley; 2004: 288-313.
9. Ball L, Beukelman D, Pattee G. Acceptance of augmentative and alternative communication technology by persons with amyotropic lateral sclerosis. Augment Altern Commun 2004;20: 113-22.
10. Blom Johansson M, Carlsson M, Sonnander K. Communication difficulties and the use of communication strategies: from the perspectives of adults with aphasia. Int J Lang Commun Disord 2012;47: 144-55.
11. Murphy J. ''I prefer contact this close'': perceptions of AAC by people with motor neurone disease and their communication partners. Augment Altern Commun 2004;20: 259-71.
12. Johnson J, Inglebret E, Jones C, Ray J. Perspectives of speech language pathologists regarding success versus abandonment of AAC. Augment Altern Commun 2006;22: 85-99.
13. Mirenda P. Toward functional augmentative and alternative communication options for students with autism: manual signs, graphic symbols, and voice output communication aids. Lang Speech Hear Serv Schools 2003;34: 203-16.
14. Sutherland D, Gillon G, Yoder D. AAC use and serivce provision: a survey of New Zealand speech-language therapists. Augment Altern Commun 2005;21: 295-307.
15. Siu E, Tam E, Sin D, et al. A survey of augmentative and alternative communication service provision in Hong Kong. Augment Altern Commun 2010;26: 289-98.
16. Wormnaes S, Abdel Malek T. Egyptian speech therapists want more knowledge about augmentative and alternative communication. Augment Altern Commun 2004;20: 30-41.
17. Johnson H, Douglas J, Bigby C, Iacono T. Maximising community inclusion through mainstream communication services for adults with severe disabilities. Int J Speech-Language Pathol 2009;11: 180-90.
18. Lund SK, Light J. Long-term outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: part III - contributing factors. Augment Altern Commun 2007;23: 323-35.
19. West D, Johnson H, Lyon K, Iacono T. Outcomes of the non-electronic communication aids scheme (NECAS) for adults with communication difficulties. Full Report. Melbourne: Scope; 2011.
20. Dattilo J, Estrella G, Estrella L, et al. ''I have chosen to live life abundantly'': perceptions of leisure by adults who use augmentative and alternative communication. Augment Altern Commun 2008;24: 16-28.
21. McNaughton D, Rackensberger T, Benedek-Wood E, et al. ''A child needs to be given a chance to success'': parents of individuals who use AAC describe the benefits and challenges of learning AAC technologies. Augment Altern Commun 2008;24: 43-55.
22. Rackensberger T, Krezman C, McNaughton D, et al. ''When I first got it, I wanted to throw it off the cliff'': the challenges and benefits of learning AAC technologies as described by adults with use AAC. Augment Altern Commun 2005;21: 165-86.
23. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006;3: 77-101.
24. Liamputtong P. Qualitative research methods. Sydney: Oxford University Press; 2009.
25. Miles M, Huberman A. Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 1994.
26. Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications Inc.; 2002.
27. Beukelman DR, Fager S, Ball L, Dietz A. AAC for adults with acquired neurological conditions: a review. Augment Altern Commun 2007;23: 230-42.
28. Mirenda P, Brown K. A picture is worth a thousand words: using visual supports for augmented input with individuals with autism. In: Mirenda P, Iacono T, eds. Autism and AAC. Baltimore (MD): Paul H. Brookes; 2009: 303-32.
29. Beukelman DR, Ball LJ, Fager S. An AAC personal framework: adults with acquired complex communication needs. Augment Altern Commun 2008;24: 255-67.
30. Ball LJ, Beukelman DR, Anderson E, et al. Duration of AAC technology use by persons with ALS. J Med Speech Lang Pathol 2007;15: 371-81.
31. Light J. Toward a definition of communicative competence for individuals using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Augment Altern Commun 1989;5: 137-44.
32. Ballin L, Balandin S. An exploration of loneliness: communication and social networks of older people with cerebral palsy. J Intellect Dev Disabil 2007;32: 315-26.
33. Smith M. The dual challenges of aided communication and adolescence. Augment Altern Commun 2005;21: 67-79.
34. Blockberger S, Armstrong R, O'Connor A, Freeman R. Children's attitudes toward a nonspeaking child using various augmentative and alternative communication techniques. Augment Altern Commun 1993;9: 243-50.
35. Gorenflo C, Gorenflo D, Santer S. Effects of synthetic voice output on attitudes toward the augmented communicator. J Speech Hear Res 1994;37: 64-8.
36. Beukelman D, Mirenda P. Augmentative and alternative communication: supporting children and adults with complex communication needs. Baltimore (MD): Paul H. Brookes; 2005.
37. Scope. Too little too late: wait times and cost burden for people with a disability in seeking equipment funding in Victoria. Melbourne: Scope (Vic); 2006.
38. Hodge S. Why is the potential of augmentative and alternative communication not being realized? Exploring the experiences of people who use communication aids. Disabil Soc 2007; 22: 457-71.
39. McDonald R, Harris E, Price K, Jolleff N. Elation or frustration? Outcomes following the provision of equipment during the Communication Aids Project: data from one CAP partner centre. Child Care Health Dev 2008;34: 223-9.