The value of powered mobility scooters from the perspective of elderly spouses of the users – a qualitative study

References

• United Nations. Department of economic and social affairs, population division,‘World population ageing 2013′ (ST/ESA/SER. A/348). New York (NY): United Nations; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. World report on ageing and health. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlberg R, Blomquist U-B, Richter A, et al. The service delivery system for assistive technology in Sweden: current situation and trends. Technol Disabil. 2015;26(4):191–197.
   Google Scholar
• Bartfai A, Boman IL. Policies concerning assistive technology and home modification services for people with physical and cognitive disabilities in Sweden. NeuroRehabilitation. 2011;28(3):303–308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salminen AL, Brandt A, Samuelsson K, et al. Mobility devices to promote activity and participation: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41(9):697–706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pettersson I, Hagberg L, Fredriksson C, et al. The effect of powered scooters on activity, participation and quality of life in elderly users. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2016;11(7):558–563.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagberg L, Hermansson L, Fredriksson C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of powered mobility devices for elderly people with disability. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;12(2):115–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Kane CM, Mann WC, Tomita M, et al. Reasons for device use among caregivers of the frail elderly. Phys Occup Ther Geriatr. 2001;20(1):29–47.
   Google Scholar
• Madara Marasinghe K. Assistive technologies in reducing caregiver burden among informal caregivers of older adults: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2016;11(5):353–360.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messecar DC, Archbold PG, Stewart BJ, et al. Home environmental modification strategies used by caregivers of elders. Res Nurs Health. 2002;25(5):357–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mortenson WB, Demers L, Fuhrer MJ, et al. Effects of a caregiver-inclusive assistive technology intervention: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Geriatr. 2018;18(1):97.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pettersson I, Berndtsson I, Appelros P, et al. Lifeworld perspectives on assistive devices: lived experiences of spouses of persons with stroke. Scand J Occup Ther. 2005;12(4):159–169.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Demers L, Fuhrer MJ, Jutai J, et al. A conceptual framework of outcomes for caregivers of assistive technology users. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;88(8):645–655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudman DL, Hebert D, Reid D. Living in a restricted occupational world: the occupational experiences of stroke survivors who are wheelchair users and their caregivers. Can J Occup Ther. 2006;73(3):141–152.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mortenson WB, Demers L, Fuhrer MJ, et al. How assistive technology use by individuals with disabilities impacts their caregivers: a systematic review of the research evidence. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;91(11):984–998.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24(2):105–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahan-Oliel N, Gelinas I, Mazer B. Social participation in the elderly: what does the literature tell us? Crit Rev Phys Rehabil Med. 2008;20(2):159–176.
   Google Scholar
• Frank A, Neophytou C, Frank J, et al. Electric-powered indoor/outdoor wheelchairs (EPIOCs): users' views of influence on family, friends and carers. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2010;5(5):327–338.
   PubMedGoogle 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(4):297–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sund T, Iwarsson S, Anttila H, et al. Effectiveness of powered mobility devices in enabling community mobility-related participation: a prospective study among people with mobility restrictions. PM R. 2015;7(8):859–870.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Samuelsson K, Wressle E. Powered wheelchairs and scooters for outdoor mobility: a pilot study on costs and benefits. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9(4):330–334.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stav WB, Hallenen T, Lane J, et al. Systematic review of occupational engagement and health outcomes among community-dwelling older adults. Am J Occup Ther. 2012;66(3):301–310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torkia C, Reid D, Korner-Bitensky N, et al. Power wheelchair driving challenges in the community: a users' perspective. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2015;10(3):211–215.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pettersson C, Iwarsson S, Brandt A, et al. Men's and women's perspectives on using a powered mobility device: benefits and societal challenges. Scand J Occup Ther. 2014;21(6):438–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Widehammar C, Lidström Holmqvist K, Pettersson I, et al. Attitudes is the most important environmental factor for use of powered mobility devices–users’ perspectives. Scand J Occup Ther. 2020;27(4):298–211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giesbrecht E. Application of the human activity assistive technology model for occupational therapy research. Aust Occup Ther J. 2013;60(4):230–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenker JA, Paquet VL. A new conceptual model for assistive technology outcomes research and practice. Assist Technol. 2004;16(1):1–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vrkljan B. Facilitating technology use in older adulthood: the Person-Environment-Occupation Model revisited. Brit J Occup Ther. 2010;73(9):396–404.
   Google Scholar
• Auger C, Demers L, Gelinas I, et al. Powered mobility for middle-aged and older adults: systematic review of outcomes and appraisal of published evidence. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;87(8):666–680.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lofqvist C, Pettersson C, Iwarsson S, et al. Mobility and mobility-related participation outcomes of powered wheelchair and scooter interventions after 4-months and 1-year use. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2012;7(3):211–218.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar