Presentation on theme: "How service users feel about the appearance of assistive equipment Natasha Parsons."— Presentation transcript:
How service users feel about the appearance of assistive equipment Natasha Parsons
Introduction Why is it relevant to OT? What evidence is available? Summary and justification for the project Gaps for further research
Relevance to OT Functional design of equipment ‘Inclusive design’ Impact on occupational participation and independence
Literature review: findings Attitude towards assistive equipment linked to utilisation (Brooks, USA, 1991) –Population: USA, adults, range of equipment –Mostly beneficial and a ‘key to normality’ –32% found them restricting, 32% inconvenient, and only 11% were proud of them.
Literature review: findings (cont.) Successful incorporation of equipment into self– image led to greater participation in occupations (Lund and Nygard, 2003) –Population: Sweden, adults, range of equipment Concern with the negative image of the device was limited to the first mobility device and was temporary (Pippin and Fernie, 1997) –Population: USA, elderly, walking frames
Literature review: findings (cont.) Products that are most visible as disability aids are often the most stigmatised (Mann and Tomita, 1998) –Population: USA, elderly, range of equipment Products that fit with dominant values associated with functioning were well received e.g. computer technology (Lupton and Seymour, 2000) –Population: Australia, adults, range of equipment
Literature review: findings (cont.) Appearance of the device is an important factor in deciding whether or not to use it. This not only applied to personal devices but also devices for the home (Hirsch et al, 2000) –Population: USA, elderly, range of equipment More choice leads to more interest in appearance (Pugh and Stansfield, 1989) –Population: UK, adults, adapted cups
Summary and justification for project Acceptance of equipment depends on incorporation of equipment into a self-image of independence, rather than disability People feel stigmatised when using ‘visible’ equipment More thoughtful design likely to lead to more acceptance of equipment and increased occupational participation
Areas for further research Investigate occupational participation with equipment designed with function and form in mind. Demographic variations Refusal rates
References Barber, Johan (1996). The design of disability products: a psychological perspective, British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59(12), 561-564 Brooks, Nancy A. (1991). Users’ responses to ADs for physical disability, Social Science Medicine, 32(12), 1417-1424 Chamberlain E., Evans N., Neighbour K., Hughes J. (2001). Equipment: is it the answer. An audit of equipment provision, British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64(12), 595-600 Christie, I. and Mensah-Coker, G (1999) An inclusive future? Disability, social change and opportunities for greater inclusion by 2010, DEMOS, London Hawkins, Rachael and Stewart, Sandra (2002). Changing rooms: the impact of adaptations on the meaning of home for a disabled person and the role of occupational therapists in the process, British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65(2), 81-87 Hirsch, T., Forlizzi, J., hyder, E., Goetz, J., Stroback, J., Kurtz, C. (2000). The ELDer project: social, emotional, and environmental factors in the design of eldercare technologies, ACM Conference on Universal Usability, 72-79 Hocking, Claire (1999). Function or feelings: factors in abandonment of ADs, Technology and Disability, 11, 3-11 Kronlof, Greta H. and Sonn, Ulla (1999). Elderly women’s way of relating to ADs, Technology and Disability, 10, 161-168. Lau, Cynthia and O’Leary, Stephanie (1993). Comparison of computer interface devices for persons with severe physical disabilities, American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47(11) 1022-1029 Lund, Maria L. and Nygard, Louise (2003). Incorporating or resisting ADs: different approaches to achieving a desired occupational self-image, OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 23(2), 67-75
References (cont.) Lupton, Deborah and Seymour, Wendy (2000). Technology, selfhood and physical disability, Social Science and Medicine, 50, 1851-1862 Mann, William C. and Tomita, Machiko (1998). Perspectives on ADs among elderly persons with disabilities, Technology and Disability, 9, 119-148 Mulcahey, M. J. (1992). Returning to school after a spinal cord injury: perspectives from four adolescents, American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 46(4), 305-312 Pape, T. L-B., Kim, J., Weiner, B. (2002). The shaping of individual meanings assigned to assistive technology: a review of personal factors, Disability and Rehabilitation, 24(1/2/3), 5-20 Pippin, Ken and Fernie, Geoffrey R. (1997). Designing devices that are acceptable to the frail elderly: a new understanding based upon how older people perceive a walker, Technology and Disability, 7, 93-102 Pope, C and Mays, N. (2001) Qualitative Research in Health Care, BMJ Publishing group Pugh, Moyra and Stansfield, Sharon (1989). Drinking equipment: preparing a DEAP report, British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52(11), 416-420 Winchcombe, M. and Silver, D. (2000) Into the mainstream, bringing products for easier living out of the disability closet, DLCC, Manchester. Department of Health (2000) The NHS Plan: a plan for investment; a plan for reform Department of Health (2001) Guide to Integrating Community Equipment Services Department of Health (2001) Community Equipment Services The Audit Commission (2002) Fully Equipped
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.