Participation after acquired brain injury: Associations with everyday technology and activities in daily life

References

• World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Geneva: WHO; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Law M. Participation in the occupations of everyday life. Am J Occup Ther 2002;56:640–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson G, Tham K, Borg J. Occupational gaps in everyday life 1–4 years after acquired brain injury. J Rehabil Med 2006;38:159–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Legg LA, Drummond AE, Langhorne P. Occupational therapy for patients with problems in activities of daily living after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;18:CD003585.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson U, Hogberg H, Bernspang B. Participation in everyday occupations in a late phase of recovery after brain injury. Scand J Occup Ther 2007;14:116–25.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fallahpour M, Tham K, Joghataei MT, Jonsson H. Perceived participation and autonomy: Aspects of functioning and contextual factors predicting participation after stroke. J Rehabil Med 2011;43:388–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haggstrom A, Lund ML. The complexity of participation in daily life: A qualitative study of the experiences of persons with acquired brain injury. J Rehabil Med 2008;40:89–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson G, Kottorp A, Borg J, Tham K. Relationship between occupational gaps in everyday life, depressive mood and life satisfaction after acquired brain injury. J Rehabil Med 2009;41:187–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayo NE, Wood-Dauphinee S, Cote R, Durcan L, Carlton J. Activity, participation, and quality of life 6 months poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1035–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fallahpour M, Tham K, Joghataei MT, Eriksson G, Jonsson H. Occupational gaps in everyday life after stroke and the relation to aspects of functioning and perceived life satisfaction. OTJR: Occupation, Participation, and Health 2011;31:200–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kottorp A, Nygard L. Development of a short-form assessment for detection of subtle activity limitations: Can use of everyday technology distinguish between MCI and Alzheimer’s disease? Expert Rev Neurother 2011;11:647–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nygard L, Starkhammar S. The use of everyday technology by people with dementia living alone: Mapping out the difficulties. Aging Ment Health 2007;11:144–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linden A, Lexell J, Larsson Lund M. Perceived difficulties using everyday technology after acquired brain injury: Influence on activity and participation. Scand J Occup Ther 2010;17:267–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engstrom AL, Lexell J, Lund ML. Difficulties in using everyday technology after acquired brain injury: A qualitative analysis. Scand J Occup Ther 2010;17:233–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassberg AC, Prellwitz M, Larsson Lund M. The challenges of everyday technology in the workplace for persons with acquired brain injury. Scand J Occup Ther 2013;20:272–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassberg AC, Malinowsky C, Jacobsson L, Lund ML. Ability to manage everyday technology after acquired brain injury. Brain Inj 2013;27:1583–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson Lund M, Nygard L, Kottorp A. Perceived difficulty in the use of everyday technology: Relationships with everyday functioning in people with acquired brain injury with a special focus on returning to work. Disabil Rehabil 2014;36:1618–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fallahpour M, Kottorp A, Nygard L, Lund ML. Perceived difficulty in use of everyday technology in persons with acquired brain injury of different severity: A comparison with controls. J Rehabil Med 2014;46:635–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perenboom RJ, Chorus AM. Measuring participation according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:577–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardol M, de Haan RJ, van den Bos GA, de Jong BA, de Groot IJ. The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: The impact on participation and autonomy (IPA). Clin Rehabil 1999;13:411–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardol M, De Jong BA, Ward CD. On autonomy and participation in rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:970–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fallahpour M, Jonsson H, Joghataei MT, Nasrabadi AN, Tham K. “I am not living my life”: Lived experience of participation in everyday occupations after stroke in Tehran. J Rehabil Med 2013;45:528–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammel J, Magasi S, Heinemann A, Whiteneck G, Bogner J, Rodriguez E. What does participation mean? An insider perspective from people with disabilities. Disabil Rehabil 2008;30:1445–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson Lund M, Nordlund A, Nygard L, Lexell J, Bernspang B. Perceptions of participation and predictors of perceived problems with participation in persons with spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Med 2005;37:3–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund ML, Nordlund A, Bernspang B, Lexell J. Perceived participation and problems in participation are determinants of life satisfaction in people with spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil 2007;29:1417–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardol M, de Haan RJ, de Jong BA, van den Bos GA, de Groot IJ. Psychometric properties of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82:210–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardol M, Beelen A, van den Bos GA, de Jong BA, de Groot IJ, de Haan RJ. Responsiveness of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1524–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nygard L. Manual to the revised questionnaire about everyday technology in home and society. Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ II) & Short ETUQ (S-ETUQ). Stockholm: Karolinska Institutet, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Occupational Therapy; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Waehrens EE. editor. Measuring quality of occupational performance based on self-report and observation. Development and validation of instruments to evaluate ADL task performance. Umeå, Sweden, Umeå University; Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation: Occupational Therapy; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Waehrens EE, Fisher AG. Improving quality of ADL performance after rehabilitation among people with acquired brain injury. Scand J Occup Ther 2007;14:250–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sonn U, Törnqvist K. The ADL taxonomy: From individual categorical data to ordinal categorical data. Scand J Occup Ther 1999;6:11–20.
   Google Scholar
• Waehrens EE, Fisher AG. Developing linear ADL ability measures based on the ADL Taxonomy: A Rasch analysis. Scand J Occup Ther 2009;16:159–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson JT, Pettigrew LE, Teasdale GM. Structured interviews for Glasgow Outcome Scale and the Extended Glassgow Outcome Scale: Guidelines for their use. J Neurotrauma 1998;15:573–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kersten P; Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA), Manual to English version. Utrecht: Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research. 2007. Available from http://www.nivel.nl. [Last accessed 27 September 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Lund ML, Lexell J. Relationship between participation in life situations and life satisfaction in persons with late effects of polio. Disabil Rehabil 2009;31:1592–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund ML, Fisher AG, Lexell J, Bernspang B. Impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire: Internal scale validity of the Swedish version for use in people with spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Med 2007;39:156–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund ML, Lexell J. Associations between perceptions of environmental barriers and participation in persons with late effects of polio. Scand J Occup Ther 2009;16:194–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg L, Nygård L, Kottorp A. Everyday technology use questionnaire: Psychometric evaluation of a new assessment of competence in technology use. OTJR: Occupation, Participation, and Health 2009;29:52–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg L, Kottorp A, Winblad B, Nygard L. Perceived difficulty in everyday technology use among older adults with or without cognitive deficits. Scand J Occup Ther 2009;16:216–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hallgren M, Nygard L, Kottorp A. Technology and everyday functioning in people with intellectual disabilities: A Rasch analysis of the Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ). J Intellect Disabil Res 2011;55:610–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nygard L, Pantzar M, Uppgard B, Kottorp A. Detection of activity limitations in older adults with MCI or Alzheimer’s disease through evaluation of perceived difficulty in use of everyday technology: A replication study. Aging Ment Health 2012;16:361–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piercy M, Carter J, Mant J, Wade DT. Inter-rater reliability of the Frenchay activities index in patients with stroke and their careers. Clin Rehabil 2000;14:433–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond T, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. 2nd edition Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Linacre JM. WINSTEPS Rasch measurement computer software. version 3.63.0 Chicago: Winsteps; 2006. Available from http://www.winsteps.com.
   Google Scholar
• Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA Press; 1982.
   Google Scholar
• Wright BD, Stone MH. Best test design. Chicago: MESA Press; 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Wright BD, Linacre JM. Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Trans 1994;8:370.
   Google Scholar
• Linacre JM. What do infit and outfit mean-square and standardized mean? Rasch Measurement Trans 2002;16:878.
   Google Scholar
• Colton T. Statistics in medicine. Boston, MA: Little, Brown; 1974.
   Google Scholar
• SPSS. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (software program). 22.0 ed Chicago, IL: SPSS; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Fallahpour M, Jonsson H, Joghataei MT, Kottorp A. Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA): Psychometric evaluation of the Persian version to use for persons with stroke. Scand J Occup Ther 2011;18:59–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar