Cargando…

Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review

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 t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Borgnis, Francesca, Desideri, Lorenzo, Converti, Rosa Maria, Salatino, Claudia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687703/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37782310
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/51124
_version_ 1785152029511909376
author Borgnis, Francesca
Desideri, Lorenzo
Converti, Rosa Maria
Salatino, Claudia
author_facet Borgnis, Francesca
Desideri, Lorenzo
Converti, Rosa Maria
Salatino, Claudia
author_sort Borgnis, Francesca
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10687703
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106877032023-11-30 Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review Borgnis, Francesca Desideri, Lorenzo Converti, Rosa Maria Salatino, Claudia JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol Review 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. JMIR Publications 2023-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC10687703/ /pubmed/37782310 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/51124 Text en ©Francesca Borgnis, Lorenzo Desideri, Rosa Maria Converti, Claudia Salatino. Originally published in JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technology (https://rehab.jmir.org), 15.11.2023. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technology, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://rehab.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Review
Borgnis, Francesca
Desideri, Lorenzo
Converti, Rosa Maria
Salatino, Claudia
Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review
title Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review
title_full Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review
title_fullStr Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review
title_short Available Assistive Technology Outcome Measures: Systematic Review
title_sort available assistive technology outcome measures: systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687703/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37782310
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/51124
work_keys_str_mv AT borgnisfrancesca availableassistivetechnologyoutcomemeasuressystematicreview
AT desiderilorenzo availableassistivetechnologyoutcomemeasuressystematicreview
AT convertirosamaria availableassistivetechnologyoutcomemeasuressystematicreview
AT salatinoclaudia availableassistivetechnologyoutcomemeasuressystematicreview