The future of the provision process for mobility assistive technology: a survey of providers.
Brad E Dicianno, James Joseph, Stacy Eckstein and 6 others
PMID 29557196WHAT IT FOUND
Providers ranked transfer aids and new wheelchair power sources most important.
They said clients often choose equipment but rarely get adequate long-term maintenance support. Insurance approval was the biggest barrier.
Key findings
01Devices to assist transfers and new power sources for wheelchairs were consistently ranked as most important by providers.
02Most providers said clients often or always play an active role in equipment decisions, but most also said clients rarely or never get adequate long-term maintenance support.
03The most commonly cited barrier to obtaining new mobility technology was the insurance approval process.
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
This is a survey of provider opinions, not a clinical trial, so it cannot show that any assistive technology improves mobility, function, or quality of life. Participants were recruited through conferences, listservs, newsletters, websites, and social media, so the sample may not represent all providers. The survey was online, so providers without internet access or comfort with technology may be under-represented. The authors say they sampled a small proportion of US providers, although participants came from many states and had varied clinical, technical, and financial roles. Clients and users of mobility technology were not surveyed here, so their own priorities may differ from provider opinions. Some terms, such as adequate support, were not defined, so responses to those questions are hard to compare. Most participants did not report facilitators, so the list of facilitators is based on a small number of open-ended responses.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read provider priorities as proof that advanced mobility technology improves function. This survey reports opinions about future research and provision barriers; it did not test any device or measure client outcomes.