Encounters between older adults and occupational therapists during the assistive technology application process

References

• Cook AM, Polgar JM. Assistive technologies: principles and practice. 4th ed. St. Louis (MO): Elsevier/Mosby; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Gjerde S. Hjelpemiddelbehov i framtida. Ei framskrivning av talet på brukarar av hjelpemiddel fram mot 2060 [Assistive technology needs in the future. A projection of the number of users of assistive technology until 2060]. Arbeid og Velferd. 2013;2:118–126. Norwegian.
   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: an exploratory randomized controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;92:297–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kylberg M, Löfqvist C, Tomsone S, et al. A European perspective on the service delivery systems for assistive technology – differences and similarities between Latvia and Sweden. J Cross Cult Gerontol. 2015;30:51–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrich R, Mathiassen N, Hoogerwerf E, et al. Service delivery systems for assistive technology in Europe: An AAATE/EASTIN position paper. Technol Disabil 2013;25:127–146.
   Google Scholar
• Bekendtgørelse af lov om social service [Publication of law on social service], LBK nr 1270 af 24/10/2016, Social- og indenrigsministeriet. 2016. Danish
   Google Scholar
• Socialstyrelsen. Lovgrundlag [Legislative Framework]. Odense (Denmark): Socialstyrelsen; [cited 2018 Jan 16]. Available from: https://socialstyrelsen.dk/tvaergaende-omrader/hjaelpemidler-og-velfaerdsteknologi/om-hjaelpemidler/lovgrundlag. Danish.
   Google Scholar
• Brandt A, Christensen A, Grünberger P. Formidling af hjaelpemidler til voksne borgere [The provision of assistive technology to adult citizens]. Odense: Socialstyrelsen; 2014. Danish.
   Google Scholar
• Brandt A, Christensen A, Grunberger P. How to Accomplish the Assistive Technology Service Delivery Process for Adults in Order to Obtain the Best Outcomes - A Literature Review. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2015;217:469–477.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Socialstyrelsen. Kartläggning av vetenskapliga studier kring förskrivningsprocessen [Mapping of scientific studies about the prescription process]. Sverige: Socialstyrelsen; 2015. Swedish.
   Google Scholar
• Larsson Ranada Å, Lidström H. Satisfaction with assistive technology device in relation to the service delivery process–a systematic review. Assist Technol. 2017;09:1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Gramstad A, Storli SL, Hamran T. Older individuals’ experiences during the assistive technology device service delivery process. Scand J Occup Ther. 2014;21:305–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson K, Borell L, Lilja M. Older persons’ navigation through the service system towards home modification resources. Scand J Occup Ther. 2009;16:227–237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortenson WB, Miller WC. The wheelchair procurement process: perspectives of clients and prescribers. Can J Occup Ther. 2008;75:167–175:
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hedberg-Kristensson E, Ivanoff SD, Iwarsson S. Participation in the prescription process of mobility devices: experiences among older patients. Br J Occup Ther. 2006;69:169–176.
   Google Scholar
• Pettersson I, Appelros P, Ahlström G. Lifeworld perspectives utilizing assistive devices: individuals, lived experience following a stroke. Can J Occup Ther. 2007;74:15–26.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hedberg-Kristensson E, Iwarsson S. Therapist attitudes and strategies to client-centred approaches in the provision of mobility devices to older clients. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2013;8:381–386.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mortenson WB, Dyck I. Power and client-centred practice: an insider exploration of occupational therapists’ experiences. Can J Occup Ther. 2006;73:261–271.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maitra KK, Erway F. Perception of client-centered practice in occupational therapists and their clients. Am J Occup Ther. 2006;60:298–310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortenson WB, Clarke LH, Best K. Prescribers’ experiences with powered mobility prescription among older adults. Am J Occup Ther. 2013;67:100–107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jörg F, Boeije HR, Schrijvers AJ. Professionals assessing clients’ needs and eligibility for electric scooters in the Netherlands: both gatekeepers and clients’ advocates. Br J Occup Ther. 2005;35:823–842.
   Google Scholar
• Barbara A, Curtin M. Gatekeepers or advocates? Occupational therapists and equipment funding schemes. Aust Occup Ther J. 2008;55:57–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassberg A, Skär L. Experiences of ethical dilemmas in rehabilitation: Swedish occupational therapists’ perspectives. Scand J Occup Ther. 2008;15:204–211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricoeur P. Interpretation theory: discourse and the Surplus of Meaning. 6th ed. Fort Worth (TX): Texas Christian University Press; 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Spradley JP. Participant observation. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers; 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Spradley JP. The ethnographic interview. Belmont (CA): Wadsworth Group/Thomson Learning; 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen BD. Sygeplejepraksis: sprog & erkendelse [Nursing practice: language and acknowledgement] [Doctoral dissertation]. Århus: Afdeling for Sygeplejevidenskab, Aarhus Universitet; 1999. Danish.
   Google Scholar
• Agerskov H. The living kidney donor: a qualitative study investigating donors’ experiences and considerations during the donation process [Doctoral dissertation]. Odense: Research Unit of Nursing, University of Southern Denmark; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Dreyer PS, Pedersen BD. Distanciation in Ricoeur’s theory of interpretation: Narrations in a study of life experiences of living with chronic illness and home mechanical ventilation. Nurs Inq. 2009;16:64–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kittel A, Marco AD, Stewart H. Factors influencing the decision to abandon manual wheelchairs for three individuals with a spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24:106–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wackerhausen S. Collaboration, professional identity and reflection across boundaries. J Interprof Care. 2009;23:455–473.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilcock AA. Reflections on doing, being and becoming. Can J Occup Ther. 1998;65:248–256.
   Google Scholar
• Hammell KW. Dimensions of meaning in the occupations of daily life. Can J Occup Ther. 2004;71:296–305.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilcock AA, Hocking C. An occupational perspective of health. 3rd ed. Thorofare (NJ): SLACK Incorporated; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Friederich A, Bernd T, De Witte L. Methods for the selection of assistive technology in neurological rehabilitation practice. Scand J Occup Ther. 2010;17:308–318.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammell KW. Opportunities for well-being: the right to occupational engagement. Can J Occup Ther. 2017;84:209–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arthanat S, Simmons CD, Favreau M. Exploring occupational justice in consumer perspectives on assistive technology. Can J Occup Ther. 2012;79:309–319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green J, Thorogood N. Qualitative methods for health research. 3rd ed. Los Angeles (CA): SAGE; 2014.
   Google Scholar