Current assistive technology (AT) provision efforts in less-resourced environments rely on heuristic methods to monitor and improve service provision, instead of evidence-based practice (EBP) which has become standard in well-resourced regions. To introduce EBP methods, and evaluate the impact of technology on the lives of people with disabilities, we collaborated with clinicians at the Indian Spinal Injuries Centre (ISIC). Two studies were conducted using ISIC quality assurance data collected with our assistance. Based on our experience at ISIC, a third study was performed to investigate the challenges to international AT research, and develop strategies to overcome these challenges.
The first study was conducted with individuals receiving new AT from ISIC. The data consisted of a baseline PART survey and 6-month and 12-month follow-ups taken with a majority (92%) outpatient population. Thirteen clients completed all three questionnaires. Results showed trends toward increased community participation and life satisfaction over the 12-month period. ISIC is planning to expand its implementation of the PART survey, perhaps online.
The second study was conducted with individuals (69% inpatient) who received new wheelchairs from ISIC. The Wheelchair Skills Test and QUEST were administered before and after personal wheelchair provision. Seven clients completed a full set of pre- and post-tests. Trends toward increased skill completion rates, increased skill attempt rates, and slightly increased safety scores were found. QUEST scores increased in the post-test, bringing scores close to values reported in literature.
The third study, conducted using a three-round Delphi method online, involved the participation of 13 experts in AT and rehabilitation research with experience working in low- and middle-income countries. During the first questionnaire round, participants were asked to identify domains of research that they considered the most challenging. In the second round, they were asked to rank and categorize the challenges as being either ethical or logistical, and also to suggest strategies to address them. In the final round, participants were asked to critique each strategy on its efficacy. Topics discussed included local collaboration, appropriate tools and techniques, translation, retention, compensation, and funding. Verifying the efficacy of suggested strategies could be the subject of future research.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:PITT/oai:PITTETD:etd-07222009-144003 |
| Date | 10 September 2009 |
| Creators | Jefferds, Alexandra Nicole |
| Contributors | Rory A. Cooper, Jon L. Pearlman, Katherine Seelman |
| Publisher | University of Pittsburgh |
| Source Sets | University of Pittsburgh |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | http://etd.library.pitt.edu/ETD/available/etd-07222009-144003/ |
| Rights | restricted, I hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dissertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to University of Pittsburgh or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report. |
Page generated in 0.0079 seconds