User satisfaction with mobility assistive devices: An important element in the rehabilitation process

Background. An assistive device often means an evident change in a person's ability, more easy to notice than the effects of most of other types of physiotherapy or occupational therapy intervention. In spite of this, there is very little evidence in this area. Purpose. The objective was to follow-up user satisfaction with and the use and usefulness of rollators and manual wheelchairs. The objective was also to determine any difference in satisfaction between users of the two different types of mobility assistive products. Methods. A random sample of 262 users participated in the study, 175 rollator users and 87 wheelchair users. The Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology—QUEST 2.0 and an additional questionnaire were used for data collection. Results. Overall satisfaction with both types of device was high and most clients reported use of their device on a daily basis. There was a difference in how the users estimated the usefulness and other characteristics as well as some service aspects related to prescription and use of the two types of device. Most users reported not having had any follow-up; however, most users had not experienced any need for one. Conclusions. A standardized follow-up will give rehabilitation professionals continuous and valuable information about the effect of and satisfaction with assistive devices.

[1]  R Weiss-Lambrou,et al.  Item Analysis of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST) , 2000, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[2]  恵子 紀国谷 国際生活機能分類(International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF)にみた福祉・保健・医療の専門職協働における連携に関する貢献と課題 , 2007 .

[3]  N. Edwards,et al.  Factors associated with cane use among community dwelling older adults. , 2000, Public health nursing.

[4]  Dave L. Edyburn,et al.  Creating an Assistive Technology Outcomes Measurement System: Validating the Components. , 2004 .

[5]  A. Buysse,et al.  Awareness among community-dwelling elderly of assistive devices for mobility and self-care and attitudes towards their use. , 2002, Social science & medicine.

[6]  C. Wolfson,et al.  Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis , 2002, Disability and rehabilitation.

[7]  Steven G. Yeomans,et al.  The Clinical Application of Outcomes Assessment , 1999 .

[8]  A. Farel,et al.  Assistive devices as an early childhood intervention: evaluating outcomes , 1999 .

[9]  Å. Brandt,et al.  Satisfaction with rollators among community-living users: a follow-up study , 2003, Disability and rehabilitation.

[10]  H Nazirah,et al.  THE APPLICATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF FUNCTIONING, DISABILITY AND HEALTH (ICF) BY WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION(WHO) IN REHABILITATION MEDICINE PRACTICE , 2007 .

[11]  Yen-ho Wang,et al.  Adrenal Gland Volume After Spinal Cord Injury , 2002, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[12]  Assistive technology outcomes: commodity or a therapy? , 2002, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[13]  L. D. de Witte,et al.  Key dimensions of client satisfaction with assistive technology: a cross-validation of a Canadian measure in The Netherlands. , 2001, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[14]  Rhoda Weiss-Lambrou,et al.  An international content validation of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST) , 1999 .

[15]  L Demers,et al.  Development of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST). , 1996, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[16]  S. Söderberg,et al.  Disabled Persons' Experience of Dependence on Assistive Devices , 2002 .

[17]  R. Wessels,et al.  Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of QUEST 2.0 with users of various types of assistive devices , 2003, Disability and rehabilitation.

[18]  K. Samuelsson,et al.  User Satisfaction with Mobility Assistive Devices , 2004 .

[19]  Where does assistive technology fit in ICIDH-2? , 2002, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.