Understanding Computer Users With Tetraplegia: Survey of Assistive Technology Users

An online survey in the form of a questionnaire was conducted to obtain the opinion of computer users with tetraplegia on their current computer interfaces and to assess desirable applications for future independent control using assistive devices. The survey included questions related to information about the respondents' injury/disease, everyday activities and social life, electronic devices and computer programs, evaluation of computer interfaces, and desirable applications for assistive devices. The survey was distributed via tetraplegia associations, magazines, and Internet forums mainly in Denmark and Sweden, but also through other European and American associations. Thirty-one completed questionnaires were collected from individuals with spinal cord injury and other neuromuscular diseases that resulted in tetraplegia. Respondents evaluated gaze and head trackers; speech recognition systems; chin, mouth, and hand joysticks; sip and puff interfaces; and typing sticks. Most interfaces were evaluated in a range from neutral to good. Users expressed a desire for applications to independently control wheelchairs, television sets, doors, and windows. This is, as far as is known, the first study that compares a wide range of current commercial computer interfaces that have been used as part of the users' everyday lives. The answers are useful for designing and developing alternative computer interfaces and assistive devices and for computer-interface users to identify a computer-interface fitting more to his or her needs.

[1]  Maarten J. IJzerman,et al.  Survey of the needs of patients with spinal cord injury: impact and priority for improvement in hand function in tetraplegics , 2004, Spinal Cord.

[2]  Kent L. Norman,et al.  Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface , 1988, CHI '88.

[3]  Lotte N. S. Andreasen Struijk Tongue-computer interface for disabled people , 2006 .

[4]  P. Kennedy,et al.  A multi-centre study of the community needs of people with spinal cord injuries: the first 18 months , 2010, Spinal Cord.

[5]  Jennifer Preece,et al.  Electronic Survey Methodology: A Case Study in Reaching Hard-to-Involve Internet Users , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[6]  Alabama,et al.  Spinal Cord Injury Facts and Figures at a Glance , 2013, The journal of spinal cord medicine.

[7]  M. P. Bolton,et al.  Mouse emulator for tetraplegics , 2006, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[8]  Lotte N. S. Andreasen Struijk,et al.  An Inductive Tongue Computer Interface for Control of Computers and Assistive Devices , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  Steven L. Johnson,et al.  A P300-Based Brain–Computer Interface: Effects of Interface Type and Screen Size , 2010, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[10]  Steve Draper,et al.  Questionnaires as a software evaluation tool , 1983, CHI '83.

[11]  James R. Lewis,et al.  IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation and instructions for use , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[12]  John Paulin Hansen,et al.  Gaze typing compared with input by head and hand , 2004, ETRA.

[13]  Ann Heylighen,et al.  How relative absolute can be: SUMI and the impact of the nature of the task in measuring perceived software usability , 2007, AI & SOCIETY.

[14]  Panu Harmo,et al.  Needs and solutions - home automation and service robots for the elderly and disabled , 2005, 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[15]  D. Stokic,et al.  Perceived information needs of community-dwelling persons with chronic spinal cord injury: Findings of a survey and impact of race , 2007, Disability and rehabilitation.

[16]  Jeff Sauro,et al.  The Factor Structure of the System Usability Scale , 2009, HCI.

[17]  Spinal Cord Injury Facts and Figures at a Glance , 2014, The journal of spinal cord medicine.

[18]  Constantine Stephanidis,et al.  User Interfaces for All: Concepts, Methods, and Tools , 2009 .

[19]  Dan Witzner Hansen,et al.  Eye typing off the shelf , 2004, CVPR 2004.

[20]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[21]  D. Wolfe,et al.  Information needs and information sources of individuals living with spinal cord injury. , 2006, Health information and libraries journal.

[22]  C Lau,et al.  Comparison of computer interface devices for persons with severe physical disabilities. , 1993, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[23]  Lotte N. S. Andreasen Struijk Tongue based control method and system , 2006 .

[24]  John Hetling,et al.  Comparison of Three Head-Controlled Mouse Emulators in Three Light Conditions , 2009, Augmentative and alternative communication.

[25]  J. Burkell,et al.  The dilemma of survey nonresponse , 2003 .

[26]  Xueliang Huo,et al.  A Magnetic Wireless Tongue-Computer Interface , 2007, 2007 3rd International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering.

[27]  Pat A. Brown,et al.  Information Needs of People With Spinal Cord Injuries , 2009, The journal of spinal cord medicine.

[28]  Roger K. Moore Modeling data entry rates for ASR and alternative input methods , 2004, INTERSPEECH.

[29]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  A proposed index of usability: A method for comparing the relative usability of different software systems , 1997, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[30]  Philip Constantinou,et al.  Designing human-computer interfaces for quadriplegic people , 2003, TCHI.

[31]  B. Schneirdeman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[32]  S. Rossignol,et al.  Functional plasticity following spinal cord lesions. , 2006, Progress in brain research.

[33]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..