Evaluation of manual wheelchairs by individuals with spinal cord injuries

References

• Routhier F, Vincent C, Desrosiers J, Nadeau S. Mobility of wheelchair users: a proposed performance assessment framework. Disability and Rehabilitation 2003; 25: 19–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward D. Prescriptive seating for wheeled mobility. Theory, application and terminology. Health Wealth International, Kansas City, KS 1994
   Google Scholar
• Samuelssson K, Tropp H, Nylander E, Gerdle B. The effect of rear-wheel position on seating ergonomics and mobility efficiency in wheelchair users with spinal cord injuries: A pilot study. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 2004; 41: 65–74
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levi R. The Stockholm spinal cord injury study. Sweden Karolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Neurosciences and Family Medicine, Stockholm 1996, [dissertation]
   Google Scholar
• Westgren N. Women with traumatic spinal cord injury. Sweden Karolinska Institutet, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Occupational Therapy and Elderly Care Research, Stockholm 1999, [dissertation]
   Google Scholar
• Holtz A. Early management after acute traumatic spinal cord injury. Uppsala J Med Sci 1995; 100: 93–124
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dahllöf A G, Höök O, Stjernberg L. Ryggmärgsskador. Rehabiliteringsmedicin (in Swedish). 3rd ed., O Höök. Liber Utbildning AB, Stockholm 1995; 331–375
   Google Scholar
• Samuelsson K, Larsson H, Thyberg M, Tropp H. Back pain and spinal deformity-common among wheel chair users with spinal cord injuries. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 1996; 3: 28–32
   Google Scholar
• Curtis K, Drysdale G, Lanza D, Kolber M, Vitolo R, West R. Shoulder pain in wheelchair users with tetraplegia and paraplegia. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1999; 80: 453–457
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer A, Andersen E, Hagglund J. A model of outcomes research. Spinal Cord Injury 2000; 81(Suppl. 2)S81–S90
   Google Scholar
• Daylan M, Cardenas D D, Gerard B. Upper extremity pain after spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 1999; 37: 191–195
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boninger M, Cooper R, Fitzgerald S, Lin J, Cooper R, Dicianno B, Liu B. Investigating neck pain in wheelchair users. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2003; 82: 197–202
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuelsson K. Active wheelchair use in daily life. Linköpings University, LinköpingSweden 2002, [dissertation]
   Google Scholar
• Smith R O. Measuring the outcomes of assistive technology: challenge and innovation. Assistive Technology 1996; 8: 71–81
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kirby R L, Swuste J, Dupuis D J, MacLeod D A, Monroe R. The Wheelchair Skills Test: A pilot study of a new outcome measure. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2002; 83: 10–18
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May L A, Butt C, Minor L, Kolbinson K, Tulloch K. Measurement reliability of functional tasks for persons who self-propel a manual wheelchair. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2003; 84: 578–583
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills T, Holm M B, Trefler E, Schmeler M, Fitzgerald S, Boninger M. Development and consumer validation of the Functional Evaluation in a Wheelchair (FEW) instrument. Disability and Rehabilitation 2002; 24: 38–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Ruyter F. Evaluating outcomes in assistive technology: Do we understand the commitment?. Assistive Technology 1995; 7: 3–16
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pollock N, McColl M A. Assessment in client-centered occupational therapy. Client-centered occupational therapy, M Law. SLACK, New York 1998; 89–105
   Google Scholar
• Whalley Hammell K. Spinal cord injury; quality of life; occupational therapy: Is there a connection?. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 1995; 58: 151–157
   Google Scholar
• Wressle E, Öberg B, Henriksson C. The rehabilitation process for the geriatric stroke patient – An exploratory study of goal setting and interventions. Disability and Rehabilitation 1999; 21: 80–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuelsson K, Larsson H, Thyberg M, Gerdle B. Wheelchair seating intervention. Results from a client-centred approach. Disability and Rehabilitation 2001; 23: 677–682
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demers L, Wessels R, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. Development of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST). Assistive Technology 1996; 8: 3–13
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Demers L, Wessels R, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. Item analysis of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST). Assistive Technology 2000; 12: 96–105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss-Lambrou R, Tremblay C, LeBlanc R, Lacoste M, Dansereau J. Wheelchair seating aids: How satisfied are consumers?. Assistive Technology 1999; 11: 43–53
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demers L, Wessels R, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B, De Witte L. Key dimensions of client satisfaction with assistive technology: A cross-validation of a Canadian measure in the Netherlands. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2001; 33: 187–191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demers L, Monette M, Lapierre Y, Arnold D, Wolfson C. Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis. Disability and Rehabilitation 2002; 24: 21–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demers L, Wessels R, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B, De Witte L. An international content validation of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST). Occupational Therapy International 1999; 6: 159–175
   Google Scholar
• Wessels R D, De Witte L P. Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of QUEST 2.0 with users of various types of assistive devices. Disability and Rehabilitation 2003; 25: 267–272
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. QUEST 2.0-Qubec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology. 2000, Available from: http://members.aol.com/IMPT97/MPT.html
   Google Scholar
• Hjälpmedelsinstitutet, Vällingby, Sweden. QUEST 2.0- ett utvärderingsinstrument för hjälpmedel (in Swedish). 2001
   Google Scholar
• Samuelsson K, Larsson H, Thyberg M. Wheelchair intervention – A client centered approach. Technology and Disability 1999; 10: 123–127
   Google Scholar
• Wressle E, Samuelsson K. User satisfaction with mobility assistive devices. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 2004; 11: 143–150
   Google Scholar
• Boninger M, Baldwin M, Cooper R, Koontz A, Chan L. Manual wheelchair pushrim biomechanics and axle position. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2000; 81: 608–613
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boninger M, Souza A, Cooper R, Fitzgerald S, Koontz A, Fay B. Propulsion patterns and pushrim biomechanics in manual wheelchair propulsion. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2002; 83: 718–723
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes C, Weimar W, Sheth P, Brubaker C. Biomechanics of wheelchair propulsion as a function of seat position and user-to-chair interface. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1992; 73: 263–269
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masse L, Lamontagne M, O'Riain M. Biomechanical analysis of wheelchair propulsion for various seating positions. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 1992; 29: 12–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monette M, Weiss-Lambrou R, Dansereau J. In search of a better understanding of wheelchair sitting- comfort and discomfort. RESNA June, 1999; 218–220
   Google Scholar
• Reference Manual for the International Standards for Neurological and Functional Classification of Spinal Cord Injury. The American Spinal Association, Chicago, IL 1994
   Google Scholar