Documentation of and satisfaction with the service delivery process of electric powered scooters among adult users in different national contexts

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate how different service delivery systems for assistive devices were associated with the service delivery process (SDP) and user satisfaction in two national contexts when electric powered scooters were provided.

Method: The study had a follow-up design based on a consecutive inclusion of 50 Danish and 86 Norwegian adults as they were about to be provided a scooter. A study-specific structured questionnaire for documentation of the SDP was administered. The Satisfaction with Assistive Technology Services was used for documenting user satisfaction with the SDP. Besides descriptive statistics, regression analysis was used to identify contributors of variance and predictors of user satisfaction.

Results: The various steps of the SDP were carried out to a various degree. Significantly more total time was spent in the SDP in the Danish sample (p < 0.001). About 80% of the informants were satisfied/very satisfied with different aspects of the SDP. Time spent in the different steps was not associated with user satisfaction with the SDP.

Conclusion: This study supports the assumption that structure of the service impacts on the SDP, but not that the process impacts on outcomes in terms of user satisfaction with the SDP. It may, however, be questioned whether this actually is an outcome.

Implications for Rehabilitation

• The structure of assistive technology services impacts on the service delivery process

• Complex regulations for assistive technology grants increases the time use for assessment and administration

• User satisfaction with the service delivery process may not be an outcome dimension in the sense that outcomes are effects on the lives of users and their environments, but rather a quality indicator and therefore an evidence for more or less successful service delivery processes

Keywords::

• Mobility devices
• organisational structures
• quality development
• rehabilitation

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank all informants and data collectors.

Declaration of interest: This study was conducted in the context of the Centre for Ageing and Supportive Environment (CASE) at Lund University, funded by the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research, Sweden and by the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Service, Oslo, Norway, the Danish Centre for Assistive Technology, Aarhus, Denmark, the Municipality of Odense, Denmark, and the Ribbing Foundation, Lund, Sweden.