Assistive technology self-management intervention for older Hispanics: a feasibility study.
Elsa M Orellano-Colón, Stephanie Harrison-Cruz, Edith López-Lugo and 4 others
PMID 31172826WHAT IT FOUND
A culturally tailored group programme for older Puerto Ricans was feasible and well-accepted, with nine participants attending 85% of sessions.
Participants reported learning new strategies and using abandoned devices. However, global health scores declined slightly, and the study was too small to prove the intervention works.
Key findings
01The intervention achieved high retention (90%) and adherence (mean 85% of sessions attended) among nine older adults in a community setting.
02Participants reported four main themes: gaining new knowledge and skills, enhanced self-efficacy, increased safety, and a greater willingness to use assistive technology.
03While self-reported performance difficulties decreased, general health scores (PROMIS) showed a small declining trend, and quality of life scores remained stable.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study had a very small sample size (n=9), resulting in insufficient power to detect statistically significant changes in efficacy outcomes. There was no control group, so it is impossible to attribute changes to the intervention rather than natural variation or the passage of time. Outcome measures were administered by the same occupational therapy students who delivered the intervention, creating a risk of bias. The study did not provide assistive devices to participants due to budget constraints, so long-term use and impact could not be assessed. Participants were recruited from a single senior centre in a low-income community, limiting generalisability to other populations or settings. The authors note that older Hispanics may exhibit a tendency to select extreme response categories on Likert scales, which could skew quantitative results.
Declared interests
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health (N.I.H., Extramural).
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the decrease in IPPA scores as proof that the intervention improves function. The study was a feasibility pilot with no control group and very low statistical power, meaning these changes could be due to chance, regression to the mean, or participants wanting to please the researchers who also delivered the training.