Assistive technology and self-rated health in comparison with age peers: a longitudinal study in 55–64-year-olds

References

• Christensen K, Doblhammer G, Rau R, Vaupel JW. Ageing populations: the challenges ahead. Lancet 2009;374:1196–208
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engelen ThLM. Vergrijzing in Nederland, 1899–2000. De historische wortels van een modern probleem [Ageing in the Netherlands, 1899–2000. The historical roots of a modern problem]. In: Boonstra OWA, Doorn PK, Van Horik MPM, et al., eds. Twee eeuwen Nederland geteld. Onderzoek met de digitale Volks-, Beroeps- en Woningtellingen 1795–2001 [Two centuries of counting the Dutch: research with the digital population, labour and housing censuses of the Netherlands 1795–2001]. The Hague: Data Archiving and Networked Services; 2007:51–71
   Google Scholar
• Fries JF. The compression of morbidity. Milbank Quart 2005;83:801–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoogendijk E, Broese van Groenou MI, van Tilburg TG, Deeg DJH. Educational differences in functional limitations: comparisons of 55–65-year-olds in the Netherlands in 1992 and 2002. Int J Public Health 2008;53:281–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin LG, Freedman VA, Schoeni RF, Andreski PM. Trends in disability and related chronic conditions among people ages fifty to sixty-four. Health Aff (Millwood) 2010;29:725–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin LG, Schoeni RF. Trends in disability and related chronic conditions among the forty-and-over population: 1997–2010. Disabil Health J 2014;7:S4–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meinow B, Parker MG, Thorslund M. Complex health problems and mortality among the oldest old in Sweden: decreased risk for men between 1992 and 2002. Eur J Ageing 2010;7:81–90
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedman VA. Research gaps in the demography of aging with disability. Disabil Health J 2014;7:S60–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steel DM, Gray MA. Baby boomers' use and perception of recommended assistive technology: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2009;4:129–36
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Agree EM. The potential for technology to enhance independence for those aging with a disability. Disabil Health J 2014;7:S33–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freedman VA, Agree EM, Martin LG, Cornman JC. Trends in the use of assistive technology and personal care for late-life disability, 1992–2001. Gerontologist 2006;46:124–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowan D, Turner-Smith A. The role of assistive technology in alternative models of care for older people. Royal Commission on Long Term Care. London: Stationary Office; 1999
   Google Scholar
• Mann WC, Ottenbacher KJ, Fraas L, et al. Effectiveness of assistive technology and environmental interventions in maintaining independence and reducing home care costs for the frail elderly. A randomized controlled trial. Arch Fam Med 1999;8:210–17
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gitlin LN, Winter L, Dennis MP, et al. A randomized trial of a multicomponent home intervention to reduce functional difficulties in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2006;54:809–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agree EM, Freedman VA. A comparison of assistive technology and personal care in alleviating disability and unmet need. Gerontologist 2003; 43:335–44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verbrugge LM, Rennert C, Madans JH. The great efficacy of personal and equipment assistance in reducing disability. Am J Public Health 1997;87:384–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson DJ, Mitchell JM, Kemp BJ, et al. Effects of assistive technology on functional decline in people aging with a disability. Assist Technol 2009;21:208–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bardage C, Pluijm SMF, Pedersen NL, et al. Self-rated health among older adults: a cross-national comparison. Eur J Ageing 2005;2:149–58
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Molarius A, Berglund K, Eriksson C, et al. Socioeconomic conditions, lifestyle factors, and self-rated health among men and women in Sweden. Eur J Public Health 2007;17:125–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargent-Cox KA, Anstey KJ, Luszcz MA. Determinants of self-rated health items with different points of reference: implications for health measurement of older adults. J Aging Health 2008;20:739–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields M, Shooshtari S. Determinants of self-perceived health. Health Reports 2001;13:35–52
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Walter Rasugu Omariba D. Neighbourhood characteristics, individual attributes and self-rated health among older Canadians. Health Place 2010;16:986–95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu S, Wang R, Zhao Y, et al. The relationship between self-rated health and objective health status: a population-based study. BMC Public Health 2013;13:320
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jylhä M, Guralnik JM, Balfour J, Fried LP. Walking difficulty, walking speed, and age as predictors of self-rated health: the women's health and aging study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2001;56:M609–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rakowski W, Cryan CD. Associations among health perceptions and health status within three age groups. J Aging Health 1990;2:58–80
   Google Scholar
• Gooberman-Hill R, Ebrahim S. Making decisions about simple interventions: older people's use of walking aids. Age Ageing 2007;36:569–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupton D, Seymour W. Technology, selfhood and physical disability. Soc Sci Med 2000;50:1851–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik L, Allen S, Isenstadt D, et al. Perspectives on use of mobility aids in a diverse population of seniors: implications for intervention. Disabil Health J 2009;2:77–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders C, Donovan J, Dieppe P. The significance and consequences of having painful and disabled joints in older age: co-existing accounts of normal and disrupted biographies. Sociol Health Illn 2002; 24:227–53
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krantz O. Assistive devices utilisation in activities of everyday life – a proposed framework of understanding a user perspective. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2012;7:189–98
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gitlin LN. Why older people accept or reject assistive technology. Generations 1995;29:41–5
   Google Scholar
• Peek ST, Wouters EJ, van Hoof J, et al. Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: a systematic review. Int J Med Inform 2014;83:235–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hareven TK. Changing images of aging and the social construction of the life course. In: Featherstone M, Wernick A, eds. Images of aging: cultural representations of later life. London: Routledge Publishers; 1995:119–34
   Google Scholar
• Lumme-Sandt K. Images of ageing in a 50+ magazine. J Aging Stud 2011;25:45–51
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rushton PW, Kairy D, Archambault P, et al. The potential impact of intelligent power wheelchair use on social participation: perspectives of users, caregivers and clinicians. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014 [in press]
   Google Scholar
• Auger C, Demers L, Gelinas I, et al. Powered mobility for middle-aged and older adults: systematic review of outcomes and appraisal of published evidence. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2008;87:666–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gramstad A, Storli SL, Hamran T. “Do I need it? Do I really need it?” Elderly peoples experiences of unmet assistive technology device needs. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2013;8:287–93
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rose KC, Gitlin LN, Dennis MP. Readiness to use compensatory strategies among older adults with functional difficulties. Int Psychogeriatr 2010;22:1225–39
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deeg DJH, Westendorp-de Serière M. Autonomy and well-being in the aging population. Report from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam 1992–1993. Amsterdam: VU University Press; 1994
   Google Scholar
• Huisman M, Poppelaars J, van der HM, et al. Cohort profile: the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam. Int J Epidemiol 2011;40:868–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deeg DJH. Longitudinal characterization of course types of functional limitations. Disabil Rehabil 2005;27:253–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Sonsbeek JLA. Methodological and substantial aspects of the OECD indicator of chronic functional limitations. Maandbericht Gezondheid (CBS) 1988;88:4–17
   Google Scholar
• Den Dulk CJ, van de Stadt H, Vliegen HM. Een nieuwe maatstaf voor stedelijkheid: de omgevingsadressendichtheid [A new measure for degree of urbanisation: The address density of the surrounding area]. Maandstatistiek van de Bevolking 1992;40:14–27
   Google Scholar
• Aiken LS, West SG. Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park (CA): Sage; 1991
   Google Scholar
• Gramstad A, Storli SL, Hamran T. Exploring the meaning of a new assistive technology device for older individuals. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014. [in press]
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Russell JN, Hendershot GE, LeClere F, et al. Trends and differential use of assistive technology devices: United States, 1994. Adv Data 1997;292:1–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Deeg DJH, Kriegsman DMW. Concepts of self-rated health: specifying the gender difference in mortality risk. Gerontologist 2003; 43:376–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuck AE, Walthert JM, Nikolaus T, et al. Risk factors for functional status decline in community-living elderly people: a systematic literature review. Soc Sci Med 1999;48:445–69
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agree EM, Freedman VA. 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