Gaze-based assistive technology in daily activities in children with severe physical impairments–An intervention study

References

• Henderson S, Skelton H, Rosenbaum P. Assistive devices for children with functional impairments: impact on child and caregiver function. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2008;50(2):89–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berry BE, Ignash S. Assistive technology: providing independence for individuals with disabilities. Rehabilitation Nursing 2003;28(1):6–14.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chantry J, Dunford C. How do computer assistive technologies enhance participation in childhood occupations for children with multiple and complex disabilities? A review of the current literature. British Journal of Occupal Therapy 2010;73(8):351–365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmelmann K, Hagberg G, Beckung E, Hagberg B, Uvebrant P. The changing panorama of cerebral palsy in Sweden. IX. Prevalence and origin in the birth‐year period 1995–1998. Acta Paediatrica 2005;94(3):287–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmelmann K, Uvebrant P. Function and neuroimaging in cerebral palsy: a population‐based study. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2011;53(6):516–521.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fauconnier J, Dickinson HO, Beckung E, Marcelli M, McManus V, Michelsen SI, et al. Participation in life situations of 8–12 year old children with cerebral palsy: cross sectional European study. British Medical Journal 2009;338(24):b1458.
   Google Scholar
• Novak I, Hines M, Goldsmith S, Barclay R. Clinical prognostic messages from a systematic review on cerebral palsy. Pediatrics 2012;130(5):e1285–e1312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majnemer A, Shevell M, Law M, Birnbaum R, Chilingaryan G, Rosenbaum P, et al. Participation and enjoyment of leisure activities in school‐aged children with cerebral palsy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2008;50(10):751–758.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raghavendra P, Virgo R, Olsson C, Connell T, Lane AE. Activity participation of children with complex communication needs, physical disabilities and typically-developing peers. Developmental Neurorehabilitation 2011;14(3):145–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raghavendra P, Olsson C, Sampson J, Mcinerney R, Connell T. School participation and social networks of children with complex communication needs, physical disabilities, and typically developing peers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2012;28(1):33–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krantz O. Assistive devices utilisation in activities of everyday life–a proposed framework of understanding a user perspective. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2012;7(3):189–198.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ISO 9999:2011. Assistive products for persons with disability - classification and terminology [Internet]. International Organization for Standardization; 2011 – [cited 2014 Dec 19]. Available from: http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html
   Google Scholar
• Donegan M, Morris JD, Corno F, Signorile I, Chió A, Pasian V, et al. Understanding users and their needs. Universal Access in the Information Society 2009;8(4):259–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donegan M. Participatory design: the story of Jayne and other complex cases. In Majaranta P, Aoki H, Donegan M, Hansen DW, Hansen JP, Hyrskykari A, Räihä K (Eds). Gaze Interaction and Applications of Eye Tracking: advances in assistive technologies (pp. 55–61), 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Lariviere JA. Eye tracking: eye-gaze technology. In Soderback I (Ed). International Handbook of Occupational Therapy Interventions (pp. 339–362), 2014.
   Google Scholar
• van Niekerk K, Tönsing K. Eye gaze technology: a South African perspective. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2014(0):1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Hornof AJ, Cavender A. EyeDraw: enabling children with severe motor impairments to draw with their eyes. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 161–170), 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson K, Balandin S, Stancliffe R. Australian parents’ experiences of speech generating device (SGD) service delivery. Developmental Neurorehabilitation 2014;17(2):75–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baxter S, Enderby P, Evans P, Judge S. Barriers and facilitators to the use of high‐technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 2012;47(2):115–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Desideri L, Stefanelli B, Bitelli C, Roentgen U, Gelderblom G, de Witte L. Satisfaction of users with assistive technology service delivery: an exploratory analysis of experiences of parents of children with physical and multiple disabilities. Developmental Neurorehabilitation 2014(30):1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenker JA, Fuhrer MJ, Jutai JW, Demers L, Scherer MJ, DeRuyter F. Treatment theory, intervention specification, and treatment fidelity in assistive technology outcomes research. Assistive Technology 2010;22(3):129–138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemmingsson H, Lidstrom H, Nygard L. Use of assistive technology devices in mainstream schools: Students’ perspective. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy 2009;63(4):463–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Østensjø S, Carlberg EB, Vøllestad NK. The use and impact of assistive devices and other environmental modifications on everyday activities and care in young children with cerebral palsy. Disability and Rehabilitation 2005;27(14):849–861.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granlund M, Bjorck-Akesson E, Wilder J, Ylven R. AAC interventions for children in a family environment: implementing evidence in practice. Augmentative Alternative Communication 2008;24(3):207–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salminen A, Ryan S, Petrie H. Impact of computer augmented communication on the daily lives of speech-impaired children. Part II: services to support computer augmented communication. Technology & Disability 2004;16(3):169–177.
   Google Scholar
• Cook AM, Polgar JM, Hussey SM. Cook & Hussey’s Assistive Technologies: Principles and Practice. 3rd ed., 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Lenker JA, Paquet VL. A new conceptual model for assistive technology outcomes research and practice. Assistive Technology 2004;16(1):1–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISO 9241-11: Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs): Part 11: Guidance on usability [Internet]. International Organization for Standardization; 1998 – [cited 2015 June 25]. Available from: http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html
   Google Scholar
• Lenker JA, Scherer MJ, Fuhrer MJ, Jutai JW, DeRuyter F. Psychometric and administrative properties of measures used in assistive technology device outcomes research. Assistive Technology 2005;17(1):7–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arthanat S, Nochajski SM, Lenker JA, Bauer SM, Wu YWB. Measuring usability of assistive technology from a multicontextual perspective: the case of power wheelchairs. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy 2009;63(6):751.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ball L, Nordness A, Fager S, Kersch K, Pattee G, Beukelman D. Eye-gaze access of AAC technology for persons with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Journal Medical Speech Language Pathology 2010;18:11–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caligari M, Godi M, Guglielmetti S, Franchignoni F, Nardone A. Eye tracking communication devices in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: impact on disability and quality of life. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration 2013;14(7–8):546–552.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spataro R, Ciriacono M, Manno C, La Bella V. The eye‐tracking computer device for communication in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 2014;130(1):40–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgestig M, Sandqvist J, Parsons R, Falkmer T, Hemmingsson H. Eye gaze performance for children with severe physical impairments using gaze-based assistive technology - a longitudinal study. Assistive Technology 2015. Advanced online publication.
   Google Scholar
• Fager S, Beukelman DR, Fried-Oken M, Jakobs T, Baker J. Access interface strategies. Assistive Technology 2012;24(1):25–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Campbell M, Ramsay C. Research designs for studies evaluating the effectiveness of change and improvement strategies. Quality and Safety in Health Care 2003;12:47–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assistive Technology Products (AAC) [Internet]. Tobii Technology; 2013 - [cited 2014 Dec 22]. Available from: http://www.tobii.com/en/assistive-technology/global/products/old-or-discontinued-products/.
   Google Scholar
• Borgestig M, Falkmer T, Hemmingsson H. Improving computer usage for students with physical disabilities through a collaborative approach: a pilot study. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 2013;20(6):463–470.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiresuk TJ, Smith A, Cardillo JE. Goal attainment scaling: applications, theory, and measurement. 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Sakzewski L, Boyd R, Ziviani J. Clinimetric properties of participation measures for 5‐to 13‐year‐old children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2007;49(3):232–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steenbeek D, Gorter JW, Ketelaar M, Galama K, Lindeman E. Responsiveness of goal attainment scaling in comparison to two standardized measures in outcome evaluation of children with cerebral palsy. Clinical Rehabilitation 2011;25(12):1128–1139.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palisano RJ. Validity of goal attainment scaling in infants with motor delays. Physical Therapy1993; 73(10):651–658.
   Google Scholar
• Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. The Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST 2.0): an overview and recent progress. Technology and Disability 2002;14(3):101–105.
   Google Scholar
• Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology QUEST version 2.0. An outcome measure for assistive technology devices. [Internet]. MIDSS; [cited 2015 Nov 03]. doi:10.13072/midss.298
   Google Scholar
• King G, Imms C, Palisano R, Majnemer A, Chiarello L, Orlin M, et al. Geographical patterns in the recreation and leisure participation of children and youth with cerebral palsy: a CAPE international collaborative network study. Developmental Neurorehabilitation 2013;16(3):196–206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlin MN, Palisano RJ, Chiarello LA, Kang LJ, Polansky M, Almasri N, et al. Participation in home, extracurricular, and community activities among children and young people with cerebral palsy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2010;52(2):160–166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. 9th ed. 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Federici S, Borsci S. Providing assistive technology in Italy: the perceived delivery process quality as affecting abandonment. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2014;17:1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Hasselbring TS, Glaser CHW. Use of computer technology to help students with special needs. The Future of Children 2000;10:102–122.
   Google Scholar
• Copley J, Ziviani J. Barriers to the use of assistive technology for children with multiple disabilities. Occupational Therapy International 2004;11(4):229–243.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Villeneuve M. A critical examination of school-based occupational therapy collaborative consultation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 2009;76 Spec No:206–218.
   Google Scholar
• Beckung E, White‐Koning M, Marcelli M, McManus V, Michelsen S, Parkes J, et al. Health status of children with cerebral palsy living in Europe: a multi‐centre study. Child: Care, Health and Development 2008;34(6):806–814.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoppestad BS. Inadequacies in computer access using assistive technology devices in profoundly disabled individuals: an overview of the current literature. Disability & Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2007;2(4):189–199.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yin Foo R, Guppy M, Johnston LM. Intelligence assessments for children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2013;55(10):911–918.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himmelmann K, Lindh K, Hidecker MJ. Communication ability in cerebral palsy: a study from the CP register of western Sweden. European Journal of Paediatric Neurology 2013;17(6):568–574.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steenbeek D, Ketelaar M, Galama K, Gorter JW. Goal attainment scaling in paediatric rehabilitation: a critical review of the literature. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 2007;49(7):550–556.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar