Measurement Properties of the Late Life Disability Index Among Individuals Who Use Power Wheelchairs as Their Primary Means of Mobility

Mortenson, W. Ben; Miller, William C.; Polgar, Jan Miller

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2014.05.020

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As mentioned previously, test-retest reliability was confirmed (H1) with excellent coefficients for all four ATOP/M subscales within a one month time window in experienced PWC users. It is important to note that the coefficients were slightly lower than those obtained with the LLDI in a previous study with this population (Mortenson et al, 2014) although our estimated confidence intervals were almost all above the 0.75 threshold recommended by Andresen (2000) with lower bounds of the ICC 95% confidence intervals ranging from 0.73 to 0.87. Regarding convergent validity, we relied on the LSA and the LLDI to compare the 'without devices' and 'with devices' ATOP/M results.…”

Section: Reliability and Convergent Validitycontrasting

confidence: 83%

“…keeping in touch with others, managing health and finances). Test‐retest intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were 0.68–0.88 and 0.82–0.86 for the frequency dimension and limitation dimensions, respectively (Jette et al ., ; Mortenson, Miller & Polgar, ). With a general population of older adults, structural validity confirmed the frequency and limitation structure and severity of disability (LLDI) was positively associated with severity of functional limitation based on subjects’ scores on the SF‐36 physical functioning scale (Jette et al .).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability, convergent validity and applicability of the Assistive Technology Outcome Profile for Mobility for middle‐aged and older power wheelchair users

Auger

Rushton

Jutai

et al. 2018

Aus Occup Therapy J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Reliability and Convergent Validitycontrasting

confidence: 83%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability, convergent validity and applicability of the Assistive Technology Outcome Profile for Mobility for middle‐aged and older power wheelchair users

Auger

Rushton

Jutai

et al. 2018

Aus Occup Therapy J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ATOP-M is a self-report measure of the impact of mobility devices on the level of activity and participation of the user [ 92 ]. Mortenson et al [ 59 , 62 ] conducted 2 studies involving a wide user base (>100 patients for the study) in which they proposed the ATOP-M as a valid instrument to evaluate the impact of power wheelchairs on the level of participation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, 2 studies focused on patients. One study involving 115 end users underlined that the original scale might not be applicable to all power wheelchair users [ 62 ]. A following study by Mortenson et al [ 24 ] supported the use of LLDI in wheelchair users with multiple sclerosis and SCI.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review

Borgnis,

Desideri,

Converti

et al. 2023

JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The World Health Organization claimed that measuring outcomes is necessary to understand the benefits of assistive technology (AT) and create evidence-based policies and systems to ensure universal access to it. In clinical practice, there is an increasing need for standardized methods to track AT interventions using outcome assessments. Objective This review provides an overview of the available outcome measures that can be used at the follow-up stage of any AT intervention and integrated into daily clinical or service practice. Methods We systematically searched for original manuscripts regarding available and used AT outcome measures by searching for titles and abstracts in the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to March 2023. Results We analyzed 955 articles, of which 50 (5.2%) were included in the review. Within these, 53 instruments have been mentioned and used to provide an AT outcome assessment. The most widely used tool is the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology, followed by the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Technology Scale. Moreover, the identified measures addressed 8 AT outcome domains: functional efficacy, satisfaction, psychosocial impact, caregiver burden, quality of life, participation, confidence, and usability. The AT category Assistive products for activities and participation relating to personal mobility and transportation was the most involved in the reviewed articles. Conclusions Among the 53 cited instruments, only 17 (32%) scales were designed to evaluate specifically assistive devices. Moreover, 64% (34/53) of the instruments were only mentioned once to denote poor uniformity and concordance in the instruments to be used, limiting the possibility of comparing the results of studies. This work could represent a good guide for promoting the use of validated AT outcome measures in clinical practice that can be helpful to AT assessment teams in their everyday activities and the improvement of clinical practice.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, these data alone do not provide a complete picture of MAT [39-41], as they do not take into account the individuals’ lived experience. Although some authors have measured the frequency of participation and perceived limitations among wheelchair users [42,43], there is scarce information about their day-to-day participation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobility and Participation of People With Disabilities Using Mobility Assistive Technologies: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study

Routhier¹,

Mortenson²,

Demers³

et al. 2019

JMIR Res Protoc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Many community-dwelling individuals living with a disability use mobility assistive technologies (MATs). MAT devices are generally beneficial for individuals with mobility impairments. However, less is known about the specific factors that may foster or deter mobility and community participation. Objective The purpose of this protocol is to describe the methodology for a study including three main objectives: (1) to understand the places people using MAT go and the things they do, (2) to identify perceived barriers and facilitators as well as users’ desired environmental modifications, and (3) to understand subjective and objective issues related to environmental accessibility. Methods A mixed-methods study was conducted in Vancouver and in Quebec City. Qualitative interviews were conducted to address all three objectives. In addition, Objective 1 was achieved through collection of global positioning system (GPS) data and activity diaries with 36 participants per site who represented six types of MAT users (ie, cane, walker, crutches, manual wheelchair, power wheelchair, and scooter). All participants were invited to take part in all aspects of data collection. PhotoVoice was used to address Objectives 2 and 3. Two environmental audits were used to address Objective 2. The Stakeholders’ Walkability/Wheelability Audit in Neighbourhood (SWAN) measured perceptions related to a variety of community environmental features associated with mobility and participation. A total of 24 participants were recruited to each study site for SWAN data collection. The Measure of Environmental Accessibility (MEA) was also used to objectively measure access to exterior and interior environments selected earlier in the project by the participants that could benefit from improvements. Results Funding for this study was obtained from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Approval was obtained from the University of British Columbia Research Ethics Board and the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale Research Ethics Board. Regarding the MEA evaluations, 19 locations (ie, buildings and exterior spaces) where obstacles have been identified by the participants of the PhotoVoice focus groups have been evaluated in Quebec City and 20 locations have been identified in the Vancouver region by the participants of the community forums. Data collection for this project was completed in December 2018. Analysis and writing of manuscripts are underway. Conclusions The use of a variety of methods to gather data on participation and mobility will allow a more holistic consideration of factors influencing mobility with a MAT device. This study will provide objective information about the mobility of participants and identify barriers and facilitators that impact their mobility and community participation. Through t...

show abstract

Measurement Properties of the Late Life Disability Index Among Individuals Who Use Power Wheelchairs as Their Primary Means of Mobility

Abstract: The study provides evidence in support of the reliability and validity of the measure but suggests that the original subscale scores may not be applicable to power wheelchair users.

Cited by 7 publications

References 29 publications

Reliability, convergent validity and applicability of the Assistive Technology Outcome Profile for Mobility for middle‐aged and older power wheelchair users

Reliability, convergent validity and applicability of the Assistive Technology Outcome Profile for Mobility for middle‐aged and older power wheelchair users

Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review

Mobility and Participation of People With Disabilities Using Mobility Assistive Technologies: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About