Evaluating use and outcomes of mobility technology: A multiple stakeholder analysis

References

• Sprigle S. State of the science on wheeled mobility and seating measuring the health, activity and participation of wheelchair users. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2007;2:133–135.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guralnik JM, Ferrucci L, Pieper CF, Leveille SG, Markides KS, Ostir GV, Studenski S, et al. Lower extremity function and subsequent disability: consistency across studies, predictive models, and value of gait speed alone compared with the short physical performance battery. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000;55:M221–M231.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penninx BW, Ferrucci L, Leveille SG, Rantanen T, Pahor M, Guralnik JM. Lower extremity performance in nondisabled older persons as a predictor of subsequent hospitalization. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000;55:M691–M697.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pleis JR, Lucas JW, Ward BW. Summary Health Statistics for U.S. Adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2008. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat. 2009;10.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Canada. Canadian Community Health Survey - 2002/2003. Ottawa: Statistics Canada; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Canada. Participation and Activity Limitation Survey 2006: Tables. Retrieved from http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/[email protected]?iid=40; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics Canada. Participation and Activity Limitation Survey 2006: Tables. Retrieved from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-628-x/2007003/t/4125085-eng.htm; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Stuck AE, Walthert JM, Nikolaus T, Büla CJ, Hohmann C, Beck JC. Risk factors for functional status decline in community-living elderly people: a systematic literature review. Soc Sci Med 1999;48:445–469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woolf AD, Zeidler H, Haglund U, Carr AJ, Chaussade S, Cucinotta D, Veale DJ, Martin-Mola E. Musculoskeletal pain in Europe: its impact and a comparison of population and medical perceptions of treatment in eight European countries. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:342–347.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jette AM, Haley SM. Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment. J Rehabil Med 2005;37:339–345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jutai J. Quality of life impact of assistive technology. Rehabilitation Engineering 1999;14:2–7.
   Google Scholar
• Jutai J, Ladak N, Schuller R, Naumann S, Wright V. Outcomes measurement of assistive technologies: an institutional case study. Assist Technol 1996;8:110–120.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lenker JA, Scherer MJ, Fuhrer MJ, Jutai JW, DeRuyter F. Psychometric and administrative properties of measures used in assistive technology device outcomes research. Assist Technol 2005;17:7–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seale JK, Turner-Smith AR. Measuring the impact of assistive technologies on quality of life: Can rehabilitation professionals rise to the challenge?. In: Carr AJ, Higginson IJ, Robinson PG, editors. Quality of Life. London: BMJ Books; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Jutai JW. End-user participation in developing the Assistive Technology Outcomes Profile for Mobility (ATOP/M). In: Gelderblom GJ et al., editor. Everyday technology for independence and care. Amsterdam, IOS Press; 2011. pp 1026–1032.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: Author; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Merriam SB. Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Yin RK. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss AL, Corbin JM. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Kitzinger J. Focus groups. In: Pope C, Mays N, editors. Qualitative research in health care. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell; 2000. p 21–31.
   Google Scholar
• Liamputtong F, Ezzy D. Qualitative Research Methods. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2002. 694.
   Google Scholar
• Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N. Analysing research data. In: Pope C, Mays N, editors. Qualitative research in health care. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell; 2000. p 63–81.
   Google Scholar
• Lehoux P, Poland B, Daudelin G. Focus group research and “the patient’s view”. Soc Sci Med 2006;63:2091–2104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huberman AM, Miles MB. Data management and analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc; 1994. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. (pp. 428–444). xii, 643 p.
   Google Scholar
• Mishler E. Validation in inquiry-guided research: The role of exemplars in narrative studies. Harvard Educ Rev 1990;60:415–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jutai JW, Fuhrer MJ, Demers L, Scherer MJ, DeRuyter F. Toward a taxonomy of assistive technology device outcomes. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2005;84:294–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris F. Conceptual issues in the measurement of participation among wheeled mobility device users. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2007;2:137–148.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mortenson WB, Miller WC, Miller-Pogar J. Measuring wheelchair intervention outcomes: development of the wheelchair outcome measure. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2007;2:275–285.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cott C. Conceptualizing and measuring participation. Toronto (ON): University of Toronto; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Sumsion T, Law M. A review of evidence on the conceptual elements informing client-centred practice. Can J Occup Ther 2006;73:153–162.
   PubMedGoogle 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;30:1445–1460.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law M, Baptiste S, McColl MA, Opzoomer A, Polatajko H, Pollock N. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Ottawa (ON): CAOT Publications ACE; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Fougeyrollas P, Noreau L, Boschen K, Lepage C, St-Michel G, Tremblay J. LIFE-H 3.1: Assessment of Life Habits. Lac-Saint-Charles (Quebec): INDCP; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Heinemann AW. Community Participation Indicators Version 4.0. Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Measuring Rehabilitation Outcomes and Effectiveness. Chicago (IL): Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Scherer MJ, Sax C, Vanbiervliet A, Cushman LA, Scherer JV. Predictors of assistive technology use: the importance of personal and psychosocial factors. Disabil Rehabil 2005;27:1321–1331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorig KR, Holman H. Self-management education: history, definition, outcomes, and mechanisms. Ann Behav Med 2003;26:1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar