51
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Assessment Procedures

Iranian translation and psychometric of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with Assistive technology (QUEST2.0) on wheelchair users

, &
Pages 2125-2129 | Received 21 Aug 2022, Accepted 05 May 2023, Published online: 17 May 2023

References

  • Carvalho K, Gois Júnior MB, Sá KN. Tradução e validação do Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST 2.0) Para o idioma português do Brasil. Rev Bras Reumatol. 2014;54(4):260–267.
  • Mao H-F, Chen W-Y, Yao G, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST 2.0): the development of the Taiwanese version. Clin Rehabil. 2010;24(5):412–421.
  • Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. Item analysis of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST). Assist Technol. 2000;12(2):96–105.
  • Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. Development of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST). Assist Technol. 1996;8(1):3–13.
  • Samuelsson K, Wressle E. User satisfaction with mobility assistive devices: an important element in the rehabilitation process. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30(7):551–558.
  • Bakhsh H, Franchignoni F, Ferriero G, et al. Translation into Arabic of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology 2.0 and validation in orthosis users. Int J Rehabil Res. 2014;37(4):361–367.
  • Goodacre L, Turner G. An investigation of the effectiveness of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology via a postal survey. Br J Occup Ther. 2005;68(2):93–96.
  • Koumpouros Y, Karavasili A, Papageorgiou E, et al. Validation of the Greek version of the device subscale of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology 2.0 (QUEST 2.0). Assist Technol. 2016;28(3):152–158.
  • Demers L, Monette M, Lapierre Y, et al. Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24(1-3):21–30.
  • Chan SC, Chan AP. The validity and applicability of the Chinese version of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology for people with spinal cord injury. Assist Technol. 2006;18(1):25–33.
  • Demers L, Wessels RD, Weiss-Lambrou R, et al. An international content validation of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST). Occup Ther Int. 1999;6(3):159–175.
  • Kablan N, Bakhsh HR, Alammar W, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the arabic version of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (A-QUEST 2.0) in prosthesis users. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2022;58(1):118–126
  • Colucci M, Tofani M, Trioschi D, et al. Reliability and validity of the Italian version of Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology 2.0 (QUEST-IT 2.0) with users of mobility assistive device. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021;16(3):251–254.
  • Hwang W-J, Hwang S, Chung Y. Test-retest reliability of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology 2.0-Korean version for individuals with spinal cord injury. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27(5):1291–1293.
  • Beaton D, et al. Recommendations for the cross-cultural adaptation of health status measures. New York: american Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2002:12: p. 1–9.
  • Galeoto G, Colucci M, Guarino D, et al. Exploring validity, reliability, and factor analysis of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology in an italian population: a cross-sectional study. Occup Ther Health Care. 2018;32(4):380–392.
  • Berardi A, De Santis R, Tofani M, et al. The wheelchair use confidence scale: Italian translation, adaptation, and validation of the short form. Disabil Rehabil: assistive Technol. 2018;13(6):575–580.
  • Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. The Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST 2.0): an overview and recent progress. TAD. 2002;14(3):101–105.
  • Keith RA. Patient satisfaction and rehabilitation services. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79(9):1122–1128.
  • Jedeloo S, De Witte LP, Linssen BAJ, et al. Client satisfaction with service delivery of assistive technology for outdoor mobility. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24(10):550–557.
  • Brandt Å, Iwarsson S, Ståhl A. Satisfaction with rollators among community-living users: a follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25(7):343–353.
  • Wressle E, Samuelsson K. User satisfaction with mobility assistive devices. Scand J OccupTher. 2004;11(3):143–150.
  • Demers L, et al. Key dimensions of client satisfaction with assistive technology: a cross-validation of a Canadian measure in The Netherlands, in a friendly rest room: developing toilets of the future for disabled and elderly people. IOS Press. 2011. p. 250–258.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.