Traumatic Brain Injury &
bbbbbbAssistive Technology
 
 

What is AT? Team Case Studies Links Glossary References Abstracts home                                                                                                                                                       University of Nebraska-Lincoln   TBI Homepage		ABSTRACT      Reimer-Riess, M.L. & Wacker, R.R. (2000). Factors associated with assistive technology discontinuance among individuals with disabilities. The Journal of Rehabilitation,66 (3), 44-50.  _____________________________________________________________________ Purpose      Many individuals discontinue using their assistive technology devices because of dissatisfaction with the devices and/or services. The purpose of the research study presented in this article was to determine the factors associated with assistive technology continuance or discontinuance.  Variables     The present study examined the following concepts to determine if they were related to the continuance/discontinuance of assistive technology devices by individuals with disabilities:   Relative advantage- The advantage of using a device versus discontinuing its  use; includes effectiveness,reliability, ease of use, comfort,  and durability  Compatibility- the degree to which a device is perceived as consistent with the needs of the user Trialability- the degree to which the user can experiment with the technology prior to acquisition Re-invention- the degree to which technology is changed or modified by a user in the process of its adoption and implementation. Devices can better meet an individual's unique needs when it is modified Professional support - refers to the support provided for device training and maintenance, as well as social support Consumer involvement -refers to the user's involvement in the selection, acquisition, use and maintenance of assistive technology devices Changes in Consumers’ needs- changes in assistive technology needs as a result of changes in the life and/or priorities a person with disabilities  Subjects and Devices     Local resource teams, who were responsible for the distribution of assistive technology devices to persons with disabilities, provided the researchers with names of individuals who received funding for their devices in the state of Colorado. The study included 115 individuals and 136 assistive technology devices (27% of participants had more than one device). The devices ranged from ‘high tech’ - such as personal computers, to ‘low tech,’ such as canes and reachers. The three devices obtained most frequently were computers (21%), communication devices (16%) and adapted software (7%). Methods  To determine which factors were most closely associated with discontinuance of assistive technology devices, researchers developed a phone survey containing question items relative to the above mentioned variables. The survey  consisted mainly of a closed form interview with four open-ended questions. Separate scales were developed to assess each variable (e.g., "How hard is your assistive technology device to use?" -2=very hard, -1=hard, 1=easy, 2=very easy and "Do you feel you were (0=not, 1=somewhat, 2=very) involved in deciding upon the device?"). Results    Devices that were discontinued and not replaced by an updated version made up 32.4% of the sample.  46.7% of the individuals who had discontinued using their devices had used them one to three years prior to discontinuing, and 6.4% of the devices were never used.    Results of the study indicated that a relation existed between relative advantage and assistive technology discontinuance, as well as consumer involvement and assistive technology discontinuance.  Implications    In summary, the research from this study identified two variables related to an individual’s continuance of assistive technology. First, the technology must meet the individual’s functional need and second,  the user must be involved in the entire process when implementing an assistive technology device (i.e., education about assistive technology choices, financing options, training on use and maintenance, and selection based on knowledge of personal needs, and preferences). The results of this study provide further justification for professionals to involve individuals with disabilities in all aspects of decision making. The idea of consumer involvement is not new, but many professionals in the field of rehabilitation continue to function within a model that supports a passive role for the consumer and a role of decision maker for the rehabilitation professional. A recommended model acknowledges both consumers and professionals as team members.