Smart-device environmental control systems: experiences of people with cervical spinal cord injuries

References

• Tam C, Rigby P, Ryan S, et al. Development and the measurement of control using EADL. Technol Disabil. 2003;15:181–190.
   Google Scholar
• Craig A, Tran Y, McIsaac P, et al. The efficacy and benefits of environmental control systems for the severely disabled. Med Sci Monit. 2005;11:32–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Little R. Electronic aids for daily living. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2007;44:vii–vix.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verdonck M. Smartphone - 2, incorporating environmental control. Spinal News. 2011;Winter:30–31.
   Google Scholar
• Myburg M, Allan E, Nalder E, et al. Environmental control systems – the experiences of people with spinal cord injury and the implications for prescribers. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;2:128–136.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croser R, Garrett R, Seeger B, et al. Effectiveness of electronic aids to daily living: Increased independence and decreased frustration. Aust Occ Ther J. 2001;48:35–44.
   Google Scholar
• Verdonck M, Steggles E, Nolan M, et al. Experiences of using an environmental control system (ECS) for persons with high cervical spinal cord injury: the interplay between hassle and engagement. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9:70–78.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Erikson A, Karlsson G, Soderstrom M, et al. A training apartment with electronic aids to daily living: lived experiences of persons with brain damage. Am J Occup Ther. 2004;58:261–271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer P, Seale J. Exploring the attitudes to environmental control systems of people with physical disabilities: a grounded theory approach. Technol Disabil. 2007;19:17–27.
   Google Scholar
• Judge S, Robertson Z, Hawley M, et al. Speech-driven environmental control systems – a qualitative analysis of users’ perceptions. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2009;4:151– 157.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Verdonck M, Chard G, Nolan M. Electronic aids to daily living: be able to do what you want. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2011;6:268–281.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stickel SM, Ryan S, Rigby PJ, et al. Toward a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of electronic aids to daily living: evaluation of consumer satisfaction. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24:115–125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rigby P, Ryan SE, Campbell KA. Electronic aids to daily living and quality of life for persons with tetraplegia. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2011;6:260–267.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rigby P, Ryan S, Joos S, et al. Impact of electronic aids to daily living on the lives of persons with cervical spinal cord injuries. Assist Technol. 2005;17:89–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liamputtong P. Qualitative research methods. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods. SAGE; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Shenton AK. Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Educ Inf. 2004;22:63–75.
   Google Scholar
• Finlay L, Gough B. Reflexivity: a practical guide for researchers in health and social sciences. Malden (MA): Blackwell Science; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Häggblom-Kronlöf G, Sonn U. Use of assistive devices – a reality full of contradictions in elderly persons’ everyday life. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2007;2:335–345.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Krantz O. Assistive devices utilisation in activities of everyday life-a proposed framework of understanding a user perspective. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2012;7:189–198.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ripat J, Booth A. Characteristics of assistive technology service delivery models: stakeholder perspectives and preferences. Disabil Rehabil. 2005;27:1461–1470.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripat J, Strock A. Users’ perceptions of the impact of electronic aids to daily living throughout the acquisition process. Assist Technol. 2004;16:63–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Maltzahn WW, Daphtary M, Roa RL. Usage patterns of environmental control units by severely disabled individuals in their homes. IEEE Trans Rehab Eng. 1995;3:222–227.
   Google Scholar
• Fager SK, Burnfield JM. Patients’ experiences with technology during inpatient rehabilitation: opportunities to support independence and therapeutic engagement. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9:121–127.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McDonald DW, Boyle MA, Schumann TL. Environmental control unit utilization by high-level spinal cord injured patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;70:621–623.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar S. Ubiquitous smart home system using android application. Int J Comput Netw Commun. 2014;6:33–43. doi: 10.5121/ijcnc.2014.6103.
   Google Scholar
• Emiliani PL, Assistive technology (AT) versus mainstream technology (MST): the research perspective. Technol Disabil. 2006;1:19–29.
   Google Scholar