The psychosocial impact on standing devices

References

• ICF W. International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva: World Health Organization 2001:3–25
   Google Scholar
• Day H, Jutai J, Campbell KA. Development of a scale to measure the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: lessons learned and the road ahead. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:31–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherer MJ. Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life. Disabil Rehabil 1996;18:439–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day HY, Jutai J, Woolrich W, Strong G. The stability of impact of assistive devices. Disabil Rehabil 2001;23:400–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agree E. A quality-of-life scale for assistive technology: results of a pilot study of aging and technology. Phys Ther 2011;91:1780–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renwick R, Nourhaghighi N, Manns PJ, Rudman DL. Quality of life for people with physical disabilities: a new instrument. Int J Rehabil Res 2003;26:279–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherer M. The relationship of personal factors and subjective well-being to the use of assistive technology devices. Disabil Rehabil 2011;33:811–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louise-Bender P. The shaping of individual meanings assigned to assistive technology: a review of personal factors. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:5–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordström B, Näslund A, Ekenberg L. On an equal footing: adults’ accounts of the experience of using assistive devices for standing. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2013;8:49–57
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Newman M. The effect of supported standing in adults with upper motor neurone disorders: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2012;26:1059--77
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glickman LB, Geigle PR, Paleg GS. A systematic review of supported standing programs. J Pediatr Rehabil Med 2010;3:197–213
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arva J, Paleg G, Lange M, et al. RESNA position on the application of wheelchair standing devices. Assist Technol 2009;21:161, 168; quiz 169–171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. International Standard ISO 9999; 2007 (e) Assistive products for persons with disability Classification and terminology, 4th ed
   Google Scholar
• Nordström B, Näslund A, Nyberg L, et al. The impact of supported standing on wellbeing and quality of life. 2013
   Google Scholar
• Taylor K. Factors affecting prescription and implementation of standing-frame programs by school-based physical therapists for children with impaired mobility. Pediatr Phys Ther 2009;21:282–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenker J. A new conceptual model for assistive technology outcomes research and practice. Assist Technol 2004;16:1–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arthanat S, Bauer SM, Lenker JA, et al. Conceptualization and measurement of assistive technology usability. Disability and Rehabilitation: assist Technol 2007;2:235–48
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hocking C. Function or feelings: factors in abandonment of assistive devices. Technol Disabil 1999;11:3–11
   Google Scholar
• Pettersson I, Ahlström G, Törnquist K. The value of an outdoor powered wheelchair with regard to the quality of life of persons with stroke: a follow-up study. Assist Technol 2007;19:143–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demers L, Monette M, Descent M, et al. The psychosocial impact of assistive devices scale (PIADS): translation and preliminary psychometric evaluation of a canadian-french version. Qual Life Res 2002;11:583–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day H, Jutai J. PIADS: the psychosocial impact of assistive devices scale. Toronto: Authors; 1996
   Google Scholar
• Jutai J, Day H. Psychosocial impact of assistive devices scale (PIADS). Technol Disabil 2002;14:107–11
   Google Scholar
• Upton P, Lawford J, Eiser C. Parent–child agreement across child health-related quality of life instruments: a review of the literature. Qual Life Res 2008;17:895–913
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis E, Mackinnon A, Waters E. Parent proxy-reported quality of life for children with cerebral palsy: is it related to parental psychosocial distress? Child Care Health Dev 2011;38:553–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang I-, Sugden D, Beveridge S. Children’s perceptions of their use of assistive devices in home and school settings. Assist Technol 2009;4:95–105
   Google Scholar
• Boyd RN, Graham HK. Objective measurement of clinical findings in the use of botulinum toxin type A for the management of children with cerebral palsy. Eur J Neurol 2007;6:s23–35
   Google Scholar
• Hägglund G, Wagner P. Development of spasticity with age in a total population of children with cerebral palsy. BMC Musculoskel Disord 2008;9:150
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engel JM, Kartin D, Carter GT, et al. Pain in youths with neuromuscular disease. Am J Hosp Palliat Med 2009;26:405–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagberg B, Hagberg G, Olow I, Wendt L. The changing panorama of cerebral palsy in sweden. VII. prevalence and origin in the birth year period 1987–90. Acta Paediatr 1996;85:954–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevenson CJ, Pharoah POD, Stevenson R. Cerebral palsy-the transition from youth to adulthood. Dev Med Child Neurol 2008;39:336–42
   Google Scholar
• Ruffin N. Adolescent growth and development. Retrieved 2009;7:2010
   Google Scholar
• Larsson-Lund M, Nygård L. Incorporating or resisting assistive devices: different approaches to achieving a desired occupational self-image. Occup Part Health 2003;23:67--75
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemmingsson H, Lidström H, Nygård L. Use of assistive technology devices in mainstream schools: students’ perspective. Am J Occup Ther 2009;63:463–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bottos M, Feliciangeli A, Sciuto L, et al. Functional status of adults with cerebral palsy and implications for treatment of children. Dev Med Child Neurol 2001;43:516–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandström K, Alinder J, Öberg B. Descriptions of functioning and health and relations to a gross motor classification in adults with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil 2004;26:1023–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Förskrivningsprocessen för hjälpmedel till personer med funktionshinder (prescribing assistive devices for for people with disabilities) [Internet] Stockholm: Hjälpmedelsinstitutet; c2011. Available from: http://www.hi.se/Global/pdf/2011/11357-forskrivningsprocessen.pdf [last accessed 15 Mar 2013]
   Google Scholar
• Scherer MJ, Craddock G. Matching person & technology (MPT) assessment process. Technol Disabil 2002;14:125–31
   Google Scholar
• Salem Y, Lovelace-Chandler V, Zabel RJ, McMillan AG. Effects of prolonged standing on gait in children with spastic cerebral palsy. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2010, 2012/12;30:54–65
   Google Scholar
• Straus EW. Phenomenological psychology: the selected papers of erwin W.strauss. Tavistock Publications; 1966. translated in part from the German by Erling Eng; This selection originally published, Basic Books; 1966
   Google Scholar
• McKeever P, Rośsen BE, Robinson-Vincent K, Wright V. The significance of uprightness: parents’ reflections on children’s responses to a hands-free walker for children. Disabil Soc 2012;28:1–13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alerby E. Knowledge as a ‘body run’: learning of writing as embodied experience in accordance with Merleau-Ponty’s theory of the lived body. Indo Pac J Phenomenol 2009;9:Edition 1
   Google Scholar
• Berndtsson I. Tekniska hjälpmedel, synskadade och samhället. In: Bengtsson J, ed. Med livsvärlden som grund: Bidrag till utvecklandet av en livsvärldsfenomenologisk ansats i pedagogisk forskning. Lund: Studentlitteratur; 1999
   Google Scholar