The psychosocial impact of closed-circuit television low vision aids

References

• Phillips B, Zhao H. Predictors of assistive technology abandonment. Assistive Technology. 1993;5:36–45.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reimer-Reiss M. Assistive technology discontinuance. Paper presented at the CSUN Center on Disabilities – Technology and Persons with Disabilities Conference, (Denver) March 2000. See http://www.csun.edu/cod/ conf/2000/proceedings/0003Reimer. htm.
   Google Scholar
• Reimer-Reiss ML, Wacker RR. Factors associated with assistive technology discontinuance among individuals with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation. 2000;66(3):44–50.
   Google Scholar
• Olkin R. What psychotherapists should know about disability. New York: The Guilford Press. 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Batavia AI, Hammer GS. Toward the development of consumer-based criteria for the evaluation of assistive devices. J Rehab Res & Dev. 1990;27:425–436.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers JC, Holms MB. Assistive technology device use in patients with rheumatic disease: A literature review. Amer J Occup Thera. 1992; 46:120–127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook A. Delivery of assistive devices through a client-oriented approach. In: Redden MR, Stern VW, editors. Technology for Independent Living II: Issues in Technology for Daily Living, Education and Employment. Washington: American Association for the Advancement of Science. 1982;29–31.
   Google Scholar
• Zola I. Involving the consumer in the rehabilitation process: Easier said than done. In: Redden MR, Stern VW, editors. Technology for Independent Living II: Issues in Technology for Daily Living, Education and Employment. Washington: American Association for the Advancement of Science. 1982;112–121.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll M, Phillips B. Survey on assistive technology abandonment by new users (Cooperative Agreement No.H133E0016). Washington, DC: National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research. 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman SA, Field WE. Selection of rural assistive technology using a HyperCard-based knowledge system. Assistive Technology. 1994; 6(2):126–133.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Phillips B, Broadnax DD. National survey on abandonment of technology (Cooperative Agreement No.H133E80016). Washington, DC: National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research. 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Tewey BP, Barnicle K, Perr A. The wrong stuff. Mainstream. 1994;19(2): 19–23.
   Google Scholar
• Turner E, Barrett C, Cutshall A, Lacy BK, Keiningham J, Webster MK. The user’s perspective of assistive technology. In: Flippo KF, Inge KJ, Barcus JM, editors. Assistive technology: A resource for school, work and community. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. 1995;283–290.
   Google Scholar
• Unpublished data from a study we conducted for the Ontario Ministry of Health Assistive Devices Branch found only three community-based low vision service providers out of seventy-five with access to an on-site CCTV system. Two of these practices used the CCTV almost exclusively for demonstration purposes (patient education) and not as part of an organized assessment protocol.
   Google Scholar
• Porter T. Vision based devices for low vision assessment. International Society for Low Vision Research and Rehabilitation – Vision 2002 July 23, 2002. http://www.islrr.org/ Vision02/700.html.
   Google Scholar
• McLinden M, Douglas G, McCall S, Arter C. Developing effective practice in the use of LVAs by children who have multiple disabilities and visual impairment in the United Kingdom. 11th ICEVI World ConferenceNew Visions: Moving Toward an Inclusive Community 27 July–2 August 2002 the Netherlands. http://www.icevi. org/publications/ICEVI-WC2002/ papers/02-topic/02-mclinden.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Overbury O, Collin C. Vision Rehabilitation services in the Americas. In: Silverstone B, Lang MA, Rosenthal BP, Faye E (Eds.), The Lighthouse handbook on vision impairment and vision rehabilitation. 2000;717–732.
   Google Scholar
• Dickinson C. The place of low vision in optometric practice. In: Low vision: Principles and practice. Boston, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998;317–323.
   Google Scholar
• Seidman KR, Hood CM. Considerations in establishing low vision care. In: Rosenthal B, Cole R, (Eds.), Problems in optometry: Remediation and management of low vision. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott and Co. 249–265, 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Romfo HS. As reported in Lund R & Watson GR. The CCTV book: Habilitation and rehabilitation with closed circuit television systems. Oslo, Norway: Synsforum Ans. 1997;179.
   Google Scholar
• Corn A. Summary. In: Silverstone B, Lang MA, Rosenthal BP, Faye E (Eds.), The Lighthouse handbook on vision impairment and vision rehabilitation. 2000;1004.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson DG. ABLEDATA Fact Sheet on Video Magnifiers January 2004. http://www.abledata.com/text2/video_magnifiers.htm.
   Google Scholar
• American Academy of Ophthalmology Vision Rehabilitation Committee Vision Rehabilitation for Adults – Preferred Practice Patterns. 2001. http://www.aao.org/aao/education/lib rary/ppp/loader.cfm?url=/commonsp ot/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=2335 9.
   Google Scholar
• Bevers P, Strong JG, Plotkin AD, Johnston D. Sustained use and retention of CCTV’s in a unique government-funded lease program. AER International Conference. Toronto, Canada. July 17–20, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Day H, Jutai J. Measuring the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: The PIADS. Canadian Journal of Rehabilitation. 1996;9(2): 159–168.
   Google Scholar
• Jutai J, Day H. Psychosocial impact of assistive devices scale (PIADS). Technology & Disability. 2002;14:107–111.
   Google Scholar
• Jutai J. Quality of life impact of assistive technology. Rehabilitation Engineering. 1999;14:2–7.
   Google Scholar
• Jutai J, Rigby P, Ryan S, and Stickel S. Psychosocial impact of electronic aids to daily living. Assistive Technology. 2000;12:123–131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders GH, Jutai JW. Hearing specific and generic measures of the psychosocial impact of hearing aids. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 2004;15:238–248.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jutai J, Day H, Woolrich W, Strong G. The predictability of retention and discontinuation of contact lenses. Optometry. 2003;74:299–308.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Day H, Jutai J, Woolrich W, Strong G. The stability of impact of assistive devices. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2001;23:400–404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz CE, Sprangers MAG. Adaptation to changing health: response shift in quality-of-life research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Byard A, Strong G, Bevers P. Protocols for non-generic prescribing of Closed Circuit Television Systems for individuals with low vision. VISIO (National Foundation for the Visually Impaired and Blind, Amersfoortsestraatweg, Huizen), International Conference on Low Vision. Groningen, Netherlands. July 5–9, 1993.
   Google Scholar