Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Are there differences in factors influencing access and continued use of assistive products for people with intellectual disabilities living in group homes?

FH. Boot, M. MacLachlan, J. Dinsmore,

. 2020 ; 15 (2) : 173-182. [pub] 20190128

Language English Country Great Britain

Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Background: The World Health Organization has launched a program to promote Global Cooperation on Assistive Technology (GATE) to implement those parts of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) referring to assistive technology and products. A particular vulnerable group deeply affected by health inequity affecting access to assistive products are people with intellectual disabilities.Objective: The objective of this study is to understand the barriers and facilitators to effectively access and continuously use essential assistive products for people with intellectual disabilities.Materials and methods: Face-to-face interviews with 15 adults with a mild to profound intellectual disability and 15 providers of assistive products were conducted to gain insights about current use, needs, knowledge, awareness, access, customization, funding, follow-up, social inclusion, stigma and policies around assistive products and intellectual disability. The technique of constant comparative analysis was used to analyze the data.Results and conclusion: An overview of factors is presented that fit within seven domains for access and eight domains for continuous use of assistive products for people with intellectual disabilities. It illustrates that access and continuous use are influenced by different barriers and facilitators. These different influences should be taken into account in country policies and frameworks that seek to implement the UNCRPD through assistive technology.Implications for rehabilitationProactive assessment for assistive products by health professionals is rare and the vast majority of people with intellectual disabilities depend on carers to signal the need .A lack of education for carers around available assistive products and the benefits of assistive products for people with intellectual disabilities may lead to an underutilization for this group.The paternalistic attitude of care providers towards people with intellectual disabilities limits access and use to certain (high-tech) assistive products.The segmented and disjointed aspect of public funding to support assistive products found in this study is a key issue for policymakers who aspire to adhere to implementing the UNCRPD equally in all areas of their country.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc20025220
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20201222153740.0
007      
ta
008      
201125s2020 xxk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1080/17483107.2018.1550116 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30689464
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxk
100    1_
$a Boot, Fleur Heleen $u Assisting Living & Learning (ALL) Institute, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Ireland. Centre for Global Health, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
245    10
$a Are there differences in factors influencing access and continued use of assistive products for people with intellectual disabilities living in group homes? / $c FH. Boot, M. MacLachlan, J. Dinsmore,
520    9_
$a Background: The World Health Organization has launched a program to promote Global Cooperation on Assistive Technology (GATE) to implement those parts of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) referring to assistive technology and products. A particular vulnerable group deeply affected by health inequity affecting access to assistive products are people with intellectual disabilities.Objective: The objective of this study is to understand the barriers and facilitators to effectively access and continuously use essential assistive products for people with intellectual disabilities.Materials and methods: Face-to-face interviews with 15 adults with a mild to profound intellectual disability and 15 providers of assistive products were conducted to gain insights about current use, needs, knowledge, awareness, access, customization, funding, follow-up, social inclusion, stigma and policies around assistive products and intellectual disability. The technique of constant comparative analysis was used to analyze the data.Results and conclusion: An overview of factors is presented that fit within seven domains for access and eight domains for continuous use of assistive products for people with intellectual disabilities. It illustrates that access and continuous use are influenced by different barriers and facilitators. These different influences should be taken into account in country policies and frameworks that seek to implement the UNCRPD through assistive technology.Implications for rehabilitationProactive assessment for assistive products by health professionals is rare and the vast majority of people with intellectual disabilities depend on carers to signal the need .A lack of education for carers around available assistive products and the benefits of assistive products for people with intellectual disabilities may lead to an underutilization for this group.The paternalistic attitude of care providers towards people with intellectual disabilities limits access and use to certain (high-tech) assistive products.The segmented and disjointed aspect of public funding to support assistive products found in this study is a key issue for policymakers who aspire to adhere to implementing the UNCRPD equally in all areas of their country.
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    12
$a chráněné bydlení $7 D016352
650    12
$a dostupnost zdravotnických služeb $7 D006297
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mentální retardace $x patofyziologie $7 D008607
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a pomůcky pro sebeobsluhu $x zásobování a distribuce $7 D012656
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a MacLachlan, Malcolm $u Assisting Living & Learning (ALL) Institute, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Ireland. Centre for Rehabilitation Studies, Stellenbosch University, Tygerberg, South Africa. Olomouc University Social Health Institute (OUSHI), Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Dinsmore, John $u Centre for Practice and Healthcare Innovation, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
773    0_
$w MED00197294 $t Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology $x 1748-3115 $g Roč. 15, č. 2 (2020), s. 173-182
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30689464 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20201125 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20201222153736 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1599365 $s 1115906
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2020 $b 15 $c 2 $d 173-182 $e 20190128 $i 1748-3115 $m Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology $n Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol $x MED00197294
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20201125

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...