Kobe University Repository : Kernel タイトル Tit le Extract ion and Classificat ion of Difficult ies Faced by Pat ients with Brain Injury Living at Home While Using Everyday Technology 著者

The aim of this study is to identify the characteristics of difficulties with using everyday technology (ET) faced by the patients with acquired brain injury (ABI) in daily life by creating a table classifying the extracted difficulties. Twenty-five persons (19 men and 6 women aged from 20 to 62 years old with a mean age of 43.2 ± 13.7 years) with ABI were interviewed, using the Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ), about their perceived difficulties using ET. Data were analyzed qualitatively with a constant comparative method. Difficulties were classified into 49 primary categories according to their similarities. The primary categories were then classified into the 9 secondary categories according to cognitive dysfunctions. Daily difficulties in 25 control participants were analyzed in the same way. A classification table was obtained from these difficulties in ABI and control groups. Most of the difficulties including the category “wrong judgments” that was related to frontal lobe damage was specific to ABI group. This classification table might enable the dysfunction to be clarified.

[1]  A. Weiss,et al.  THE LOCUS OF REACTION TIME CHANGE WITH SET, MOTIVATION, AND AGE. , 1965, Journal of gerontology.

[2]  J. Botwinick,et al.  Premotor and motor components of reaction time. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[3]  H. Levin,et al.  Procedural memory during posttraumatic amnesia in survivors of severe closed head injury. Implications for rehabilitation. , 1989, Archives of neurology.

[4]  H. Levin,et al.  Long-term neuropsychological outcome and loss of social autonomy after traumatic brain injury. , 1997, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[5]  S. Brzuzy,et al.  Persons with traumatic brain injuries and their families: living arrangements and well-being post injury. , 1997, Social work in health care.

[6]  A. V. Zomeren,et al.  One year outcome in mild to moderate head injury: the predictive value of acute injury characteristics related to complaints and return to work , 1999, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[7]  D. Hoffman,et al.  Step-tracking movements of the wrist. IV. Muscle activity associated with movements in different directions. , 1999, Journal of neurophysiology.

[8]  J. Giacino,et al.  Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: recommendations for clinical practice. , 2000, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  M. Levin,et al.  Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. , 2000, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[10]  J. Evans,et al.  Reducing everyday memory and planning problems by means of a paging system: a randomised control crossover study , 2001, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[11]  F. Goffinet.  [Recommendations for clinical practice. Methods used]. , 2002, Journal de gynecologie, obstetrique et biologie de la reproduction.

[12]  M. Lange,et al.  TECHNOLOGY AND OCCUPATION: CONTEMPORARY VIEWPOINTS The Future of Electronic Aids to Daily Living , 2015 .

[13]  B. Wilson.  Cognitive rehabilitation, an integrative neuropsychological approach , 2002 .

[14]  T. Defloor,et al.  Stress and coping among families of patients with traumatic brain injury: a review of the literature. , 2005, Journal of clinical nursing.

[15]  J. Borg,et al.  Occupational gaps in everyday life 1-4 years after acquired brain injury. , 2006, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[16]  P. Emiliani.  Assistive Technology (AT) versus Mainstream Technology (MST): The research perspective , 2006 .

[17]  Jonathan J. Evans.  Memory rehabilitation—should we be aiming for restoration or compensation? , 2006, Journal of Neurology.

[18]  S. Sahrmann,et al.  Relationships between Sensorimotor Impairments and Reaching Deficits in Acute Hemiparesis , 2006, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[19]  S. Kakei,et al.  Development of a quantitative evaluation system for motor control using wrist movements--an analysis of movement disorders in patients with cerebellar diseases. , 2007, Rinsho byori. The Japanese journal of clinical pathology.

[20]  L. Nygård,et al.  The use of everyday technology by people with dementia living alone: Mapping out the difficulties , 2007, Aging & mental health.

[21]  J. Tanji,et al.  Role of the lateral prefrontal cortex in executive behavioral control. , 2008, Physiological reviews.

[22]  M. Delargy,et al.  Persons with acquired brain injury: a disabled diaspora , 2008, Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine.

[23]  M. Law,et al.  Exploring postinjury living environments for children and youth with acquired brain injury. , 2008, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[24]  L. Nygård,et al.  Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire: Psychometric Evaluation of a New Assessment of Competence in Technology Use , 2009 .

[25]  Maria Larsson Lund,et al.  Difficulties in using everyday technology after acquired brain injury: a qualitative analysis , 2010 .

[26]  B. Wilson,et al.  The assessment and rehabilitation of prospective memory problems in people with neurological disorders: A review , 2010, Neuropsychological rehabilitation.

[27]  Maria Larsson Lund,et al.  Perceived difficulties using everyday technology after acquired brain injury: Influence on activity and participation , 2010, Scandinavian journal of occupational therapy.

[28]  J. Winegardner.  Memory Rehabilitation: Integrating Theory and Practice , 2010 .

[29]  J. Verbunt,et al.  Assessment of arm activity using triaxial accelerometry in patients with a stroke. , 2011, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[30]  R. Tanemura,et al.  Community-based Interventional Programmes for Family Caregivers of Persons with Traumatic Brain Injury , 2011 .

[31]  L. Nygård,et al.  Technology and everyday functioning in people with intellectual disabilities: a Rasch analysis of the Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ). , 2011, Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR.

[32]  S. Greenberg,et al.  The Psychology of Everyday Things , 2012 .

[33]  J. Lexell,et al.  Response actions to difficulties in using everyday technology after acquired brain injury , 2012, Scandinavian journal of occupational therapy.

[34]  Maria Larsson Lund,et al.  The challenges of everyday technology in the workplace for persons with acquired brain injury , 2013, Scandinavian journal of occupational therapy.

[35]  Perceived difficulty in the use of everyday technology: relationships with everyday functioning in people with acquired brain injury with a special focus on returning to work , 2014, Disability and rehabilitation.

[36]  H. Rodgers,et al.  Accelerometer measurement of upper extremity movement after stroke: a systematic review of clinical studies , 2014, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[37]  Validation of the Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire in a Japanese Context , 2015 .

[38]  Zhe Zhang,et al.  Objective Assessment of Upper-Limb Mobility for Poststroke Rehabilitation , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.