IPPA: Individually Prioritised Problem Assessment

Wessels, Roelof; Persson, Jan; Lorentsen, Øivind; Andrich, Renzo; Ferrario, M.; Oortwijn, Wija; VanBeekum, Taeke; Brodin, Hå̊kan; Witte, Luc de

doi:10.3233/tad-2002-14310

Cited by 79 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Individually Prioritized Problem Assessment (IPPA) 10,11 was used as a secondary outcome measure for assistance users. The IPPA captures self-rated task difficulty using a 5-point rating scale, in which 5 equals too much difficulty and 1 equals no difficulty at all.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of an Assistive Technology Intervention on Older Adults with Disabilities and Their Informal Caregivers

Mortenson

Demers

Fuhrer

et al. 2013

American Journal of Physical Medicine &Amp; Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE To demonstrate experimentally that an assistive technology (AT) intervention improves older AT users’ activity performance and satisfaction with activity performance, and decreases their caregivers’ sense of burden. DESIGN A delayed intervention, randomized control trial. Baseline data were collected on 44 community-dwelling, AT user-caregiver dyads in Vancouver, British Columbia, and Montreal, Quebec. The primary outcome measures for AT users were the satisfaction and accomplishment scales from the Assessment of Life Habits. The primary outcome measure for caregivers was the Caregiver Assistive Technology Outcome Measure which assessed burden associated with dyad-identified problematic activities. RESULTS Compared to the delayed intervention group, assistance users in the immediate intervention group reported significantly increased satisfaction with activity performance (p<.001), and improved accomplishment scores (p =.014). Informal caregivers in the immediate intervention group experienced significantly decreased burden with the dyad-identified, problematic activity (p=.013). Participants in the delayed intervention group experienced similar benefits following the intervention. CONCLUSIONS This is the first experimental study to demonstrate that the provision of AT decreases caregiver burden. If confirmed and extended by subsequent research, the findings have significant policy and practice implications and may enable health-care providers to advocate for improved access to AT provision and the related follow-up services.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of an Assistive Technology Intervention on Older Adults with Disabilities and Their Informal Caregivers

Mortenson

Demers

Fuhrer

et al. 2013

American Journal of Physical Medicine &Amp; Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5 Examples of recently-developed instruments that have proved useful to measure outcome indicators of assistive solutions are the QUEST [11] (a non-device-specific instrument that measures satisfaction), the NOMO [12] (a device-specific instrument that measures effectiveness), the FABS/M [13] (a device-specific instrument that measures effectiveness), and the IPPA [14] (a non-device-specific instrument that measures usefulness). and the skills needed to properly meet the user needs.…”

Section: Question 7: How Can the Process Be Monitored By Quality Indimentioning

confidence: 99%

Service delivery systems for assistive technology in Europe: An AAATE/EASTIN position paper

Andrich

Mathiassen

Hoogerwerf

et al. 2013

TAD

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to indicate a framework for exploiting the potential role of assistive technology (AT) in supporting care and participation of people with disabilities and elderly people through appropriate service delivery systems (SDS). The paper is based on the findings of the AAATE/EASTIN workshop "Service Delivery Systems on Assistive Technology in Europe" (held in Copenhagen on May 21-22, 2012, under the patronage of the Danish EU Presidency), on the roadmaps indicated by the previous HEART Study published in 1995 by the European Commission, and on a consensus process within the Board of the AAATE (Association for Advancement of Assistive Technology in Europe) and the EASTIN Association (European Assistive Technology Information Network). The first chapter (Background) discusses the reasons why a position paper on this issue was deemed useful; it also summarises the key themes of the Copenhagen workshop and recalls the HEART Study. The second chapter (The scope of an AT SDS), discusses the concept of assistive solutions -intended as individualised interventions providing users with appropriate environmental facilitators (AT products, personalised environmental modifications, personal assistance) to overcome disability and enable participation in all aspects of life -and the mission of a SDS -ensuring that all people with disabilities can access appropriate assistive solutions that are able to support autonomy in their life environment. The paper also points out that AT service delivery policies should be well coordinated with accessibility policies i.e. those related to infrastructural interventions ensuring that the mainstream environment, products and services are usable by all people, including those with reduced function or who depend on assistive technology. The third chapter (Basic features of an AT SDS) discusses why public SDS are needed for AT, what the main AT SDS models are, and how a SDS process can be described and monitored in terms of quality. The discussion is organised into answers to eight recurring questions: 1) Are assistive technology products going to disappear in the future, due to the embodiment of accessibility features in mainstream products; 2) Why shouldn't assistive technology products be dealt with as common consumer goods, purchased directly by users without the intermediation of service delivery systems; 3) Are there different approaches for AT service delivery; 4) When can a medical model, or a social model, or a consumer model be considered appropriate; 5) Independently of the model and the Country or Region, is it possible to identify common steps in the service delivery process; 6) How does each step influence the costs and the outcomes of the whole process; 7) How can the SDS process be monitored by quality indicators; and 8) How can information support the service delivery process. The last chapter (Some recommendations) provides a number of useful recommendations for those who are engaged in the design, development and implementation of AT SDS policies. ...

show abstract

“…The first step begins with the question from the Individually Prioritised Problem Assessment (IPPA) [19] asking the user, "What are the most relevant problems that you experience and that you expect or want to see improved by using a new assistive device or service? ".…”

Section: Results: Assistive Technology Evaluation and Selection (Ates)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of an AT selection tool using the ICF model

Steel

Gelderblom

Witte

2011

TAD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assistive Technology (AT) is regularly provided by health and social services to many people with a wide range of needs or disabilities, to overcome barriers and difficulties in daily life. This research aims to develop a tool that may support practitioners to meet clients' individual needs when selecting AT by using a common language and structure for the process. A tool was developed incorporating the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model, collating information in a systematic order. Experts in the field of AT were consulted during the development of the tool and initial evaluation, and provided positive feedback on the research aims and approach. This paper describes the development of the tool and the potential added value of using the ICF in AT selection, with links to existing models and instruments. Plans for further development and testing of the tool are outlined.

show abstract

IPPA: Individually Prioritised Problem Assessment

Cited by 79 publications

References 4 publications

Effects of an Assistive Technology Intervention on Older Adults with Disabilities and Their Informal Caregivers

Effects of an Assistive Technology Intervention on Older Adults with Disabilities and Their Informal Caregivers

Service delivery systems for assistive technology in Europe: An AAATE/EASTIN position paper

Development of an AT selection tool using the ICF model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About