Potential advantages, barriers, and facilitators of implementing a cognitive orthosis for cooking for individuals with traumatic brain injury: the healthcare providers’ perspective

References

• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2015. Report to Congress on Traumatic Brain Injury in the United States: Epidemiology and Rehabilitation. Atlanta (GA): National Center for Injury Prevention and Control; Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention.
   Google Scholar
• Mapping Connections an Understanding of Neurological Conditions In Canada, 2014. Public Health Agency of Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/reports-publications/mapping-connections-understanding-neurological-conditions.html. [cited 2019 Mar 26].
   Google Scholar
• Stocchetti N, Zanier E. Chronic impact of traumatic brain injury on outcome and quality of life: a narrative review. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):148–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malec JF, Van Houtven CH, Tanielian T, et al. Impact of TBI on caregivers of veterans with TBI: burden and interventions. Brain Inj. 2017;31(9):1235–1245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubuc E, Gagnon-Roy M, Couture M, et al. Perceived needs and difficulties in meal preparation of people living with traumatic brain injury in a chronic phase: supporting long-term services and interventions. Aust Occup Ther J. 2019;66(6):720–730.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godbout L, Grenier MC, Braun CMJ, et al. Cognitive structure of executive deficits in patients with frontal lesions performing activities of daily living. Brain Inj. 2005;19(5):337–348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bottari C, Dassa C, Rainville C, et al. The criterion-related validity of the IADL Profile with measures of executive functions, indices of trauma severity and sociodemographic characteristics. Brain Inj. 2009;23(4):322–335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zarshenas S, Colantonio A, Horn SD, et al. Cognitive and motor recovery and predictors of long-term outcome in patients with traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(7):1274–1282.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison AL, Hunter EG, Thomas H, et al. Living with traumatic brain injury in a rural setting: supports and barriers across the continuum of care. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39(20):2071–2080.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leopold A, Lourie A, Petras H, et al. The use of assistive technology for cognition to support the performance of daily activities for individuals with cognitive disabilities due to traumatic brain injury: The current state of the research. NeuroRehabilitation. 2015;37(3):359–378.,
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radomski MV, Anheluk M, Bartzen P, et al. Effectiveness of interventions to address cognitive impairments and improve occupational performance after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review. Am J Occup Ther. 2016;70(3):7003180050p1–7003180050p9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO global disability action plan 2014-2021. Better health for all people with disability. [cited 2019 Feb 20]. https://www.who.int/disabilities/actionplan/en/
   Google Scholar
• Global priority research agenda for improving access to high-quality affordable assistive technology. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
   Google Scholar
• International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF, e115 & e1151: WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Wong D, Sinclair K, Seabrook E, et al. Smartphones as assistive technology following traumatic brain injury: a preliminary study of what helps and what hinders. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39(23):2387–2394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mihailidis A, Barbenel J, Fernie G. The efficacy of an intelligent cognitive orthosis to facilitate handwashing by persons with moderate to severe dementia. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2004;14(1–2):135–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mihailidis A, Boger JN, Craig T, et al. The COACH prompting system to assist older adults with dementia through handwashing: an efficacy study. BMC Geriatr. 2008;8:28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ceccacci S, Menghi R, Germani M. Example of a new smart kitchen model for energy efficiency and usability. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Smart Systems, Devices and Technologies (SMART 2015). Brussels (Belgium): IARIA; 2015. ISBN: 978-1-61208-414-5
   Google Scholar
• Ficocelli M, Nejat G. The design of an interactive assistive kitchen system. Assistive Technol. 2012;24(4):246–258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kettlewell J, Nair RD, Radford K. A systematic review of personal smart technologies used to improve outcomes in adults with acquired brain injuries. Clin Rehbil. 2019;33(11):705–1712.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillespie A, Best C, O’Neill B. Cognitive function and assistive technology for cognition: a systematic review. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2012;18(1):1–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chevignard MP, Taillefer C, Picq C, et al. Ecological assessment of the dysexecutive syndrome using execution of a cooking task. NeuropsycholRehabil. 2008;18(4):461–485.
   Google Scholar
• Giroux S, Bier N, Pigot H, et al. Cognitive assistance to meal preparation: design, implementation, and assessment in a living lab. AAAI 2015-Spring Symposium on Ambient Intelligence for Health and Cognitive Enhancement. Mar 23-25; Palo Alto (CA): AAAI; 2015. p.1-6.
   Google Scholar
• Boudreault AL, Bouchard J, Bouchard B. Validation of a smart stove for traumatic brain injury patients in a cooking task. 12th International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE); 2016 Sep 14–16; London (UK). 2016. p. 230–233.
   Google Scholar
• Pinard S, Bottari C, Laliberté C, et al. Design and usability evaluation of COOK, an assistive technology for meal preparation for persons with severe TBI. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2019;1–15. DOI:10.1080/17483107.2019.1696898
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson DR, Gaya A, Hunt A, al. e. Using the cognitive orientation to occupational performance (CO-OP) with adults with executive dysfunction following traumatic brain injury. Can J Occup Ther. 2009;76(2):115–127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandich AD, Polatajko HJ. Enabling occupation in children: the cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance (CO-OP) approach. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Bottari C, Dassa C, Rainville C, et al. A generalizability study of the instrumental activities of daily living profile. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91(5):734–742.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen CC, Bode RK. Factors influencing therapists’ decision-making in the acceptance of new technology devices in stroke rehabilitation. Amer J Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;90(5):415–425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu L, Cruz AM, Rincon AR, et al. What factors determine therapists’ acceptance of new technologies for rehabilitation – a study using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(5):447–455.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cruz DM, Emmel MG, Manzini MG, et al. Assistive technology accessibility and abandonment: challenges for occupational therapists. Open J Occup Ther. 2016;4(1):1–9. DOI:10.15453/2168-6408.1166
   Google Scholar
• Gagnon-Roy M, Bier N, Couture M, et al. Facilitators and obstacles to the use of a cognitive orthosis for meal preparation within the homes of adults with a moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: Informal caregivers and health care professionals’ perspectives. Assist Technol. 2020. DOI:10.1080/10400435.2020.1809552
   Google Scholar
• Martin D, Miller AP, Quesnel-Vallée A, Caron NR, et al. Canada’s global leadership on health 1: Canada’s universal health-care system: achieving its potential. Lancet. 2018;391(10131):1718–1735.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Who pays for rehabilitation? http://www.gtarehabnetwork.ca/faq. [cited January 2020].
   Google Scholar
• Swaine B, Cullen N, Messier F, et al. Post-acute care referral and inpatient rehabilitation admission criteria for persons with brain injury across two Canadian provinces. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40(6):697–704.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldana J. Qualitative data analysis: a method sourcebook. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publication, Inc.; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quantity J. 2018;52(4):1893–1907.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thordardottir B, Fänge AM, Lethin C, et al. Acceptance and use of innovative assistive technologies among people with cognitive impairment and their caregivers: a systematic review. Hindawi BioMed Res Int. 2019;2019:1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saborowski M, Kollak I. “How do you care for technology?” – Care professionals’ experiences with assistive technology in care of the elderly. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2015;93:133–140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oyesanya TO, Thompson N, Arulselvam K, et al. Technology and TBI: perspectives of persons with TBI and their family caregivers on technology solutions to address health, wellness, and safety concerns. Assitive Technol. 2019;1–11. DOI:10.1080/10400435.2019.1612798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu Y, Brown P, Harniss M, et al. Cognitive support technologies for people with TBI: current usage and challenges experienced. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;9(4):279–285.
   Google Scholar
• Jamieson M, Jackb R, O’Neillc B, et al. Technology to encourage meaningful activities following brain injury. Disabil Rehabil Assit Technol. 2020;15(4):453–466.
   Google Scholar
• Brunner B, Hemsley M, Togher L, et al. Technology and its role in rehabilitation for people with cognitive-communication disability following a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Brain Inj. 2017;31(8):1028–1043.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGrath C, Ellis M, Harney-Levine S, et al. Investigating the enabling factors influencing occupational therapists’ adoption of assisted living technology. Br J Occup Ther. 2017;80(11):668–675.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ownsworth T, Fleming J, Tate R, et al. Do people with severe traumatic brain injury benefit from making errors? A randomized controlled trial of error-based and errorless learning. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017;31(12):1072–1082.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jamwal R, Callaway L, Ackerl J, et al. Electronic assistive technology used by people with acquired brain injury in shared supported accommodation: implications for occupational therapy. Brit J Occup Ther. 2017;80(2):89–98.
   Google Scholar
• Marikyan D, Papagiannidis S, Alamanos E. A systematic review of the smart home literature: a user perspective. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2019;138:139–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner A, Alsop A. Unique core skills: exploring occupational therapists’ hidden assets. Brit J Occup Ther. 2015;78(12):739–749.
   Google Scholar
• Christodoulakis C, Asgarian A, Easterbrook S. Barriers to adoption of information technology in healthcare. Proceedings of ACM CASCON conference (CASCON), IBM Corp, Toronto, Canada; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Population distribution of Ontario in 2016, by rural/urban type. 2019. https://www.statista.com/statistics/608698/population-distribution-of-ontario-by-rural-urban-type/.
   Google Scholar
• Durocher E, Wang RH, Bickenbach J, et al. “Just Access”? Questions of equity in access and funding for assistive technology. Ethics Behav. 2019;29(3):172–191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peckham A, Kashef Al-Ghetaa R, Ho J, et al. Assistive devices: regulation and coverage in Canada. Toronto, Ontario (Canada): North American Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. Rapid Review (No. 4); 2018.
   Google Scholar