An ideal model of an assistive technology assessment and delivery process

Technology and Disability

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 27-38

  Federici, Stefano ^a   Scherer, Marcia J ^b   Borsci, Simone ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PERUGIA   (Italy)

^b Institute for Matching Person and Technology ^*  (United States)

^c BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Assistive technology assessment process; ICF; MPT model; Psychologist; Psychotechnologist; service delivery systems

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COMPUTER INTERFACE; CONSUMER; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HUMAN; MEDICAL PROFESSION; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIST; PROCESS MODEL; PSYCHOLOGIST; PSYCHOTECHNOLOGIST; TEAMWORK;

EID: 84940188363     PISSN: 10554181     EISSN: 1878643X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/TAD-140402     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Federici S, Scherer MJ, editors. Assistive Technology Assessment Handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2012. doi: 10.1201/b11821.
2. AAATE, EASTIN. Service Delivery Systems for Assistive Technology in Europe: Position Paper: Aaate.net; 2012 [cited 2012 Sep 27]. Available from: http://www.aaate.net/.
3. 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. Webster, NY: The Institute for Matching Person & Technology, Inc.; 1998.
4. Scherer MJ, Craddock G. Matching Person & Technology (MPT) assessment process. Technol Disabil. 2002; 3(14): 125-31.
5. World Health Organization (WHO). ICF: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva, CH: WHO; 2001.
6. AAATE. AAATE position paper: A 2003 view on Technology and Disability: Aaate.net; 2003 [cited 2012 April 10]. Available from: http://www.aaate.net/.
7. Federici S, Scherer MJ. The Assistive Technology Assessment Model and Basic Definitions. In: Federici S, Scherer MJ, editors. Assistive Technology Assessment Handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2012. pp. 1-10. doi:10.1201/b11821-2.
8. Federici S, Corradi F, Mele ML, Miesenberger K. From cognitive ergonomist to psychotechnologist: A new professional profile in a multidisciplinary team in a centre for technical aids. In: Gelderblom GJ, Soede M, Adriaens L, Miesenberger K, editors. Everyday Technology for Independence and Care: AAATE 2011. 29. Amsterdam, NL: IOS Press; 2011. pp. 1178-84. doi:10.3233/978-1-60750-814-4-1178.
9. Federici S, Scherer MJ. Preface. In: Federici S, Scherer MJ, editors. Assistive Technology Assessment Handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2012. pp. xv-xviii. doi:10.1201/ b11821-1.
10. Miesenberger K, Corradi F, Mele ML. The Psychotechnologist: A new profession in the Assistive Technology Assessment. In: Federici S, Scherer MJ, editors. Assistive Technology Assessment Handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2012. pp. 179-200. doi:10.1201/b11821-12.
11. Meloni F, Federici S, Stella A, Mazzeschi C, Cordella B, Greco F, et al. The Psychologist. In: Federici S, Scherer MJ, editors. Assistive Technology Assessment Handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2012. pp. 149-77. doi:10.1201/ b11821-11.
12. Phillips B, Zhao H. Predictors of Assistive Technology Abandonment. Assist Technol. 1993; 5(1): 36-45. doi:10.1080/ 10400435.1993.10132205.
13. Riemer-Reiss ML, Wacker R. Factors Associated with Assistive Technology Discontinuance Among Individuals with Disabilities. J Rehabil. 2000; 66(3): 44-50.
14. Riemer-Reiss ML, Wacker RR. Assistive Technology Use and Abandonment among College Students with Disabilities. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning [Internet]. 1999; 3(23). Available from: http://www.ucalgary. ca/iejll/riemer-reiss-wacker.
15. Scherer MJ. Living in the state of stuck: How technologies affect the lives of people with disabilities. 4th ed. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books, 2005.
16. Scherer MJ, Sax CL, Vanbiervliet A, Cushman LA, Scherer JV. Predictors of assistive technology use: The importance of personal and psychosocial factors. Disabil Rehabil. 2005; 27(21): 1321-31. doi:10.1080/09638280500164800.
17. Söderström S, Ytterhus B. The use and non-use of assistive technologies from the world of information and communication technology by visually impaired young people: A walk on the tightrope of peer inclusion. Disabil Soc. 2010; 25(3): 303-15. doi:10.1080/09687591003701215.
18. Verza R, Carvalho ML, Battaglia MA, Uccelli MM. An interdisciplinary approach to evaluating the need for assistive technology reduces equipment abandonment. Mult Scler. 2006; 12(1): 88-93. doi:10.1191/1352458506ms1233oa.
19. World Health Organization (WHO), World Bank. World Report on Disability. Geneva, CH: WHO, 2011.
20. Meloni F, Federici S, Stella A. The Psychologist's Role: A Neglected Presence in the Assistive Technology Assessment Process. In: Gelderblom GJ, Soede M, Adriaens L, Miesenberger K, editors. Everyday Technology for Independence and Care: AAATE 2011. 29. Amsterdam, NL: IOS Press; 2011. pp. 1199-206. doi:10.3233/978-1-60750-814-4-1199.
21. Federici S, Corradi F, Meloni F, Borsci S, Mele ML, Dandini de Sylva S, et al. A Person-Centered Assistive Technology Service Delivery Model: A Framework for Device Selection and Assignment. Life Span Disab. Accepted for pubblication.
22. Federici S, Borsci S. The use and non-use of assistive technology in Italy: A pilot study. In: Gelderblom GJ, Soede M, Adriaens L, Miesenberger K, editors. Everyday Technology for Independence and Care: AAATE 2011. 29. Amsterdam, NL: IOS Press; 2011. pp. 979-86. doi:10.3233/978-1-60750-814-4-979.
23. EBBP.org project. Defining Evidence-Based Behavioral Practice. Northwestern University, IL: EBBP.org; 2013 [cited 2013 Jan 15]. Available from: http://www.ebbp.org/ebbp. html.
24. Norman DA. The Invisible Computer: Why Good Products Can Fail, the Personal Computer is So Complex, and Information Appliances are the Solution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998.
25. Borsci S, Kurosu M, Federici S, Mele ML. Computer Systems Experiences of Users with and without Disabilities: An Evaluation Guide for Professionals. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2013. doi:10.1201/b15619-1.
26. Federici S, Borsci S. Usability evaluation: models, methods, and applications. 2010. In: International Encyclopedia of Rehabilitation [Internet]. Buffalo, NY: Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information and Exchange (CIRRIE); [1-17]. Available from: http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/ encyclopedia/article.php?id=277&language=en.
27. ISO 9241-11:1998 Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals - Part 11: Guidance on usability.
28. Federici S, Meloni F, Borsci S, Corradi F, Mele ML, Dandini de Sylva S, et al., editors. Assistive Technology Assessment Process in a Center for Technical Aid: New Professional Profiles within a Multidisciplinary Team. The Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America Annual Conference: RESNA '12; 2012 Jun 28-Jul 3; Baltimore, MD: RESNA.
29. Chua KSG, Ng Y-S, Yap SGM, Bok C-W. A Brief Review of Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2007; 36(1): 31-42.
30. Joint Committee on Interprofessional Relations Between the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and Division 40 (Clinical Neuropsychology) of the American Psychological Association. Structure and Function of an Interdisciplinary Team for PersonsWith Acquired Brain Injury [Guidelines]: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; 2007. Available from: http://www.asha.org/docs/pdf/GL2007 -00288.pdf.
31. Brown KS, Deleon PH, Loftis CW, Scherer MJ. Rehabilitation psychology: Realizing the true potential. Rehabil Psychol. 2008; 53(2): 111-21. doi:10.1037/0090-5550.53.2.111.
32. Scherer MJ. Rehabilitation Psychology. In:Weiner IB, Craighead WE, editors. The Concise Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology and Behavioral Science. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons; 2010. pp. 1444-7.
33. Scherer MJ. Connecting to Learn: Educational and Assistive Technology for People with Disabilities. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2004.
34. Scherer MJ, editor. Assistive Technology: Matching Device and Consumer for Successful Rehabilitation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2002.
35. De Kerckhove D. Communication Arts for a New Spatial Sensibility. Leonardo. 1991; 24(2): 131-5. doi:10.2307/1575281.
36. Müller D. Foreword: Global Perspectives and Emerging Themes in Assistive Technology Assessment. In: Federici S, Scherer MJ, editors. Assistive Technology Assessment Handbook. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2012. p. ix-xii. doi: 10.1201/b11821-1.
37. Norman DA. Some Observations on Mental Models. In: Gentner D, Steven AL, editors. Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 1983. pp. 7-14.
38. Demers L, Monette M, Lapierre Y, Arnold DL, Wolfson C. Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil. 2002; 24(1-3): 21-30. doi:10.1080/09638280110066352.
39. Kirakowski J, editor. SUMI User Handbook. 2nd ed. Cork, IE: Human Factors Research Group, 1998.
40. Scherer MJ, Jutai J, Fuhrer M, Demers L, Deruyter F. A framework for modelling the selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs). Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2007 Jan; 2(1): 1-8. doi:10.1080/17483100600845414.
41. Scherer MJ, McKee B. Computer aids for handicapped persons in the U.S.:What separates the users from the nonusers? 1st International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons; University of Vienna, AU: Austrian Computer Society; 1989, pp. 201-10.
42. Scherer MJ, McKee B. But will the assistive technology device be used? 12th Annual Conference: Technology for the Next Decade; Washington, DC: RESNA; 1989. pp. 356-7.
43. Federici S, Meloni F. The Biopsychosocial Model and Reciprocal Triadic Causation. In: Borsci S, Kurosu M, Federici S, Mele ML, editors. Computer Systems Experiences of Users with and without Disabilities: An Evaluation Guide for Professionals. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2013. pp. 60-3. doi:10.1201/b15619-4.