The effect of powered scooters on activity, participation and quality of life in elderly users

References

• World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001
   Google Scholar
• Hjälpmedelsinstitutet. Statistik om hjälpmedel – en översikt av nationella undersökningar. Stockholm: Hjälpmedelsinstitutet; 2009
   Google Scholar
• Hjälpmedelsinstitutet. Äldrestatistik 2010: Äldres hälsa, funktionsnedsättning, Stockholm: boende och hjälpmedel; 2010
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Sweden. The future population of Sweden 2012–2060. Stockholm; 2012
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization, National Institute on Aging, National Institute of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Global Health and Aging; 2011
   Google Scholar
• Bartfai A, Boman I-L. Policies concerning assistive technology and home modification services for people with physical and cognitive disabilities in Sweden. NeuroRehabil 2011;28:303–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auger C, Demers L, Gélinas 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
• Brandt Å, Iwarsson S, Stahle A. Older people's use of powered wheelchairs for activity and participation. J Rehabil Med 2004;36:70–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards K, McCluskey A. A survey of adult power wheelchair and scooter users. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2010;5:411–19
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• May E, Garrett R, Ballantyne A. Being mobile: electric mobility-scooters and their use by older people. Ageing Soc 2010;30:1219–37
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans S, Frank AO, Neophytou C, de Souza L. Older adults' use of, and satisfaction with, electric powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs. Age Ageing 2007;36:431–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Löfqvist C, Pettersson C, Iwarsson S, Brandt A. Mobility and mobility-related participation outcomes of powered wheelchair and scooter interventions after 4-months and 1-year use. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2012;7:211–18
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pettersson I, Törnquist K, Ahlström G. The effect of an outdoor powered wheelchair on activity and participation in users with stroke. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2006;1:235–43
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hoenig H, Pieper C, Branch LG, Cohen HJ. Effect of motorized scooters on physical performance and mobility: a randomized clinical trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:279–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies A, De Souza LH, Frank AO. Changes in the quality of life in severely disabled people following provision of powered indoor/outdoor chairs. Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:286–90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samuelsson K, Wressle E. Powered wheelchairs and scooters for outdoor mobility: a pilot study on costs and benefits. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014;9:330–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Salminen AL, Brandt A, Samuelsson K, et al. Mobility devices to promote activity and participation: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med 2009;41:697–706
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fomiatti R, Richmond J, Moir L, Millsteed J. A systematic review of the impact of powered mobility devices on older adults' activity engagement. Phys Occup Ther Geriatr 2013;31:297–309
   Google Scholar
• Reid D, Laliberte-Rudman D, Hebert D. Impact of wheeled seated mobility devices on adult users' and their caregivers' occupational performance: a critical literature review. Can J Occup Ther 2002;69:261–80
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wessels R, de Witte L, Andrich R, et al. IPPA, a user centred approach to assess effectiveness of assistive technology provision. Technol Disabil 2000;13:105–15
   Google Scholar
• Wessels R, Persson J, Lorentsen O, et al. IPPA: Individually Prioritised Problem Assessment. Technol Disabil 2002;14:141–5
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). 2014. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/whodasii/en/index.html [last accessed 1 Oct 2014]
   Google Scholar
• Ustün TB, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, et al. Developing the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Bull World Health Organ 2010;88:815–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garin O, Ayuso-Mateos JL, Almansa J, et al.; MHADIE Consortium. Validation of the “World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule, WHODAS-2” in patients with chronic diseases. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010;8:51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan M, Karlsson J, Ware JE Jr. The Swedish SF-36 Health Survey – I. Evaluation of data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability and construct validity across general populations in Sweden. Soc Sci Med 1995;41:1349–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware J, Sherbourne C. The MOS 36-ltem short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection Med Care 1992;30:473–83
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale New Jersey, Hove and London: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 1988
   Google Scholar
• Wessels R, de Witte LP, Jedeloo S, et al. Effectiveness of provision of outdoor mobility services and devices in The Netherlands. Clin Rehabil 2004;18:371–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zagol BW, Krasuski RA. Effect of motorized scooters on quality of life and cardiovascular risk. Am J Cardiol 2010;105:672–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®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
• Sullivan M, Karlsson J, Taft C, Ware J. SF-36 Hälsoenkät Svensk manual och tolkningsguide (Swedish manual and Interpretation guide). 2nd ed. Gothenburg: Sahlgrenska University Hospital; 2002
   Google Scholar
• Rosso AL, Taylor JA, Tabb LP, Michael YL. Mobility, disability, and social engagement in older adults. J Aging Health 2013;25:617–37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agahi N, Parker M. Are today's older people more active than teir predecessors? Participation in leisure-time activities in Sweden in 1992 and 2002. Ageing Soc 2005;25:925–41
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arthanat S, Nochajski SM, Lenker JA, et al. Measuring usability of assistive technology from a multicontextual perspective: the case of power wheelchairs. Am J Occup Ther 2009;63:751–64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortenson WB, Hoag E, Higgins R, et al. Stakeholders' perspectives related to the development of a scooter training program. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014. [Epub ahead of print]
   Google Scholar
• Jutai JW, Fuhrer MJ, Demers L, et al. Toward a taxonomy of assistive technology device outcomes. [Review] [43 refs]. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2005;84:294–302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortenson WB, Demers L, Fuhrer MJ, et al. Effects of an assistive technology intervention on older adults with disabilities and their informal caregivers. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2013;92:297–306
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Froehlich-Grobe K, Andresen EM, Caburnay C, White GW. Measuring health-related quality of life for persons with mobility impairments: an enabled version of the short-form 36 (SF-36E). Qual Life Res 2008;17:751–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luther SL, Kromrey J, Powell-Cope G, et al. A pilot study to modify the SF-36V physical functioning scale for use with veterans with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006;87:1059–66
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkler SLH, Fitzgerald SG, Boninger ML, Cooper RA. Relationship between quality of wheelchair and quality of life. Top Geriatr Rehabil 2008;24:264–78
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demers L, Fuhrer MJ, Jutai JW, et al. Tracking mobility-related assistive technology in an outcomes study. Assist Technol 2008;20:73–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lennartsson C, Heimerson I. Elderly people's health: health in Sweden: The National Public Health Report 2012. Chapter 5. Scand J Publ Health 2012;40:95–120
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper RA, Ferretti E, Oyster M, et al. The relationship between wheelchair mobility patterns and community participation among individuals with spinal cord injury. Assist Technol 2011;23:177–83
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neven A, Janssens D, Alders G, et al. Documenting outdoor activity and travel behaviour in persons with neurological conditions using travel diaries and GPS tracking technology: a pilot study in multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil 2013;35:1718–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auger C, Demers L, Gélinas I, et al. Life-space mobility of middle-aged and older adults at various stages of usage of power mobility devices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91:765–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar