User perceptions of powered wheelchair features.

Abstract

There has been a substantial increase in recent years in the availability of powered wheelchairs and associated features. However, the psychological factors explaining feature use are poorly understood. The current study aims to explore this issue. Semistructured interviews of 15 British wheelchairs users were conducted; all had a range of disabilities and clinically prescribed seating functions. Our aim was to explore participants' perceptions in terms of engagement and use of their wheelchair technology. Interview schedules were generated based on prior research on psychological factors associated with health and well-being. Questions focused on participants' knowledge of features and how to use them, perceived barriers and facilitating factors, motivation to use, and perceptions of social support. A theory led thematic analysis identified three themes: (a) clinical benefits and functional alternatives, (b) expectations versus reality, and (c) the impact of other people. There was diversity in the perceptions that users had of their equipment, with positive views of features linking to users' experience of functional benefits and matches between equipment and prior expectations. Recommendations are made to highlight functional as well as clinical benefits, to explore therapists' experiences of their practice, to consider how information could be presented, and to explore uses of social support and innovative technologies in future work.

The impact of a power mobility device on occupational participation and quality of life for people with chronic diseases: A scoping review

“…Within the domain of occupations, IADL included domestic activities, community mobility and shopping. These activities were mentioned most frequently, with 30 articles commenting on how a PMD contributes to occupation participation (Auger et al, 2010;Blach Rossen et al, 2012;Borisoff et al, 2018;Bowers et al, 2020;Brandt et al, 2004;Carver et al, 2016;Corazon et al, 2019;Edwards and McCluskey, 2010;Evans, 2000;Fomiatti et al, 2014;Francisco et al, 2019;Fredriksson et al, 2020;Giesbrecht et al, 2009;Hoenig et al, 2007;James et al, 2018;Jedeloo et al, 2002;Korotchenko and Hurd Clarke, 2014;Labbé et al, 2020;Löfqvist et al, 2012;May and Rugg, 2010;Pettersson, 2014;Pettersson et al, 2016;Samuelsson and Wressle, 2014;Stenberg et al, 2016;Sund and Brandt, 2018;Sund et al, 2015;Sullivan et al, 2020;Wee and Lysaght, 2009). The x Self-report of activity levels of past 7 days and groups into 3 categories estimating metabolic equivalent of tasks Life-space assessment composite score Auger et al (2010) x Mobility habits in 5 life-space levels.…”

“…The need for training in the use of PMDs was highlighted by nine studies (Blach Rossen et al, 2012;Bowers et al, 2020;Edwards and McCluskey, 2010;Hoenig et al, 2007;Jang et al, 2019;Labbé et al, 2020;; Pettersson, 2014;Sund and Brandt, 2018). Hoenig et al (2007), in a study of 43 participants, identified the need for PMD training in road rules and the use of controls to help mitigate risks of accidents when using a PMD.…”

“…The importance of PMD training was reinforced by Pettersson (2014) and Jang et al (2019) with respondents suggesting that training should be tailored to the individual. The use of wheelchair features and understanding of their clinical benefits is encouraged by Bowers et al (2020) to assist with participants' engagement.…”