16,818
Views
84
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Assistive technology provision: towards an international framework for assuring availability and accessibility of affordable high-quality assistive technology

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 467-472 | Received 05 Mar 2018, Accepted 24 Apr 2018, Published online: 09 May 2018

References

  • Andrich R, Mathiassen NE, Hoogerwerf EJ, et al. Service delivery systems for assistive technology in Europe: an AAATE/EASTIN position paper. Technol Disabil. 2013;25:127–146.
  • AAATE & EASTIN. Service delivery systems for assistive technology in Europe. Position paper, October 2012. Available from: https://aaate.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2016/02/ATServiceDelivery_PositionPaper.pdf.
  • World report on disability. World Health Organisation, Geneva, 2011. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/70670/1/WHO_NMH_VIP_11.01_eng.pdf.
  • Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. United Nations, New York, 2006.
  • Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations, 1948. Available from: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf.
  • WHO&USAID. Joint paper on the provision of mobility devices in less resourced settings. World Health Organisation, Geneva, 2011.
  • Priority Assistive Products List. World Health Organisation, Geneva, 2016.
  • Gupta S, Meershoek A, Witte LP. d. Evaluating Support Service Policies using the Capability Approach in four Asian countries. Submitted, 2017.
  • The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organisation, 2001. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/.
  • World Health Organisation disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). Geneva: World Health Organisation, 2016. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/whodasii/en/.
  • Post MWM, Witte LP. d, Reichrath E, et al. Development and validation of impact-s, an ICF-based questionnaire to measure activities and participation. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40:60–67.
  • Witte LP de, Knops H, Pyfers L, et al., editors. European service delivery systems in rehabilitation technology: HEART Line C. Hoensbroek, The Netherlands: iRv, Institute for Rehabilitation Research; 1994.
  • Steel EJ, Witte LP. d. Advances in European Assistive Technology service delivery and recommendations for further improvement. Technol Disabil. 2011;23:131–138.
  • Waldron D, Layton NA. Hard and soft assistive technologies: defining roles for clinicians. Aust Occ Ther J. 2008;55:61–64.
  • Cook AM, Polgar JM, editors. Cook and Hussey’s assistive technologies: principles and practice. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier; 2008.
  • Elsaesser LJ, Bauer S. Provision of assistive technology services method (ATSM) according to evidence-based information and knowledge management. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2011;6:386–401. 2011.
  • Federici S, Scherer M. The assistive technology assessment process model and basic definitions. In: Federici S, Scherer M, editors. Assistive technology handbook. 2nd ed. section I. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2017. p. 1–12.
  • Federici S, Meloni F, Borsci S . The abandonment of assistive technology in Italy: a survey of National Health Service users. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2016;52:516–526.
  • Federici S, Meloni F, Borsci S. How much does abandonment of assistive technology cost Italy’s national health service? Atlas of Science, April 23, 2016.
  • Bauer S, Elsaesser LJ, Scherer M, et al. Promoting a standard for assistive technology service delivery. Technol Disabil. 2014;26:39–48.
  • Federici S, Scherer M, Borsci S. An ideal model of an assistive technology assessment and delivery process. Technol Disabil. 2014;26:27–38. doi:10.3233/TAD-140402.