The purpose of this study was to determine whether the use of wheeled mobility devices differed with respect to age, gender, residential setting, and health-related factors among older adults. A total of 723 adults ageing 60 and older are representing three cohorts, from nursing homes, the Center for Assistive Technology, and the wheelchair registry from the Human Engineering Research Laboratories. Wheeled mobility devices were classified into three main groups: manual wheelchairs, power wheelchairs, and scooters. Our results found factors including age, gender, diagnosis, and living settings to be associated with differences in use of manual versus powered mobility devices. Differences in use were also noted for subtypes of manual (depot, standard, and customized) and powered (scooter, standard, and customized) mobility devices, on demographic, living arrangements, and health-related factors. Consideration of demographic, health-related, and environmental factors during the prescription process may help clinicians identify the most appropriate mobility device for the user. 1. Background Exponential growth in the number of older adults (>65 years) worldwide is expected to occur over the next half century. In the US alone, the elderly population was estimated to be 40 million in 2010 and is projected to climb to approximately 87 million by 2050 [1]. Assistive technology (AT) decreases the residual difficulties experienced by older adults as they perform daily activities, thereby reducing their reliance on others and, in turn, lowering the probability of placement in long-term care facilities. About 5% of all older individuals in the US are currently living in institutional settings. This increase in life expectancy has resulted in a growing need by this population for human assistance, technology support, or both for performance of daily activities [2–4]. Wheeled mobility devices (WhMDs), which include manual wheelchairs, power wheelchairs, and scooters, are assistive technologies commonly used by older adults. These devices may be customized and may increase independence in activities of daily living and reduce the need for human help [5]. However, a mismatch between the needs of the end users and the types of devices prescribed may result in an increased need for personal assistance or may result in abandonment of these devices [6]. In the US, an estimated 1 million WhMD users are aged 65 and older, the majority of whom use manual wheelchairs (MWC) [7]. Several factors such as fear of falling during walking; desire for faster and more efficient
References
[1]
Aging Statistics. Older American Update, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA, 2006, Contract No.: Document Number.
[2]
E. M. Agree, “The influence of personal care and assistive devices on the measurement of disability,” Social Science and Medicine, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 427–443, 1999.
[3]
E. M. Agree, V. A. Freedman, J. C. Cornman, D. A. Wolf, and J. E. Marcotte, “Reconsidering substitution in long-term care: when does assistive technology take the place of personal care?” Journals of Gerontology—Series B Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. S272–S280, 2005.
[4]
L. M. Verbrugge, C. Rennert, and J. H. Madans, “The great efficacy of personal and equipment assistance in reducing disability,” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 384–392, 1997.
[5]
H. Hoenig, D. H. Taylor Jr., and F. A. Sloan, “Does assistive technology substitute for personal assistance among the disabled elderly?” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 330–337, 2003.
[6]
D. H. Taylor and H. Hoenig, “The effect of equipment usage and residual task difficulty on use of personal assistance, days in bed, and nursing home placement,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 72–79, 2004.
[7]
S. H. Kaye, T. Kang, and M. P. LaPlante, Wheelchair Use in the United States, University of California, San Francisco, Calif, USA, 2002, Contract No.: Document Number.
[8]
L. G. Pawlson, M. Goodwin, and K. Keith, “Wheelchair use by ambulatory nursing home residents,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 860–864, 1986.
[9]
P. Clarke and A. Colantonio, “Wheelchair use among community-dwelling older adults: prevalence and risk factors in a national sample,” Canadian Journal on Aging, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 191–198, 2005.
[10]
D. A. Brechtelsbauer and A. Louie, “Wheelchair use among long-term care residents,” Annals of Long-Term Care, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 213–220, 1999.
[11]
H. Hoenig, L. R. Landerman, K. M. Shipp, and L. George, “Activity restriction among wheelchair users,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 1244–1251, 2003.
[12]
H. Hoenig, L. R. Landerman, K. M. Shipp et al., “A clinical trial of a rehabilitation expert clinician versus usual care for providing manual wheelchairs,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 53, no. 10, pp. 1712–1720, 2005.
[13]
H. Hoenig, C. Pieper, M. Zolkewitz, M. Schenkman, and L. G. Branch, “Wheelchair users are not necessarily wheelchair bound,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 645–654, 2002.
[14]
S. Ganesh, A. Hayter, J. Kim, J. Sanford, S. Sprigle, and H. Hoenig, “Wheelchair use by veterans newly prescribed a manual wheelchair,” Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 434–439, 2007.
[15]
P. C. Hunt, M. L. Boninger, R. A. Cooper, R. D. Zafonte, S. G. Fitzgerald, and M. R. Schmeler, “Demographic and socioeconomic factors associated with disparity in wheelchair customizability among people with traumatic spinal cord injury,” Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol. 85, no. 11, pp. 1859–1864, 2004.
[16]
S. L. Hubbard, S. G. Fitzgerald, D. M. Reker, M. L. Boninger, R. A. Cooper, and L. E. Kazis, “Demographic characteristics of veterans who received wheelchairs and scooters from Veterans Health Administration,” Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 831–844, 2006.
[17]
L. Resnik and S. Allen, “Racial and ethnic differences in use of assistive devices for mobility: effect modification by age,” Journal of Aging and Health, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 106–124, 2006.
[18]
J. C. Cornman and V. A. Freedman, “Racial and ethnic disparities in mobility device use in late life,” Journals of Gerontology—Series B Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. S34–S41, 2008.
[19]
S. L. Hubbard, S. G. Fitzgerald, B. Vogel, D. M. Reker, R. A. Cooper, and M. L. Boninger, “Distribution and cost of wheelchairs and scooters provided by Veterans Health Administration,” Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 581–592, 2007.
[20]
B. E. Dicianno and E. Tovey, “Power mobility device provision: understanding medicare guidelines and advocating for clients,” Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol. 88, no. 6, pp. 807–816, 2007.
[21]
R. J. Mendoza, D. J. Pittenger, F. S. Savage, and C. S. Weinstein, “A protocol for assessment of risk in wheelchair driving within a healthcare facility,” Disability and Rehabilitation, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 520–526, 2003.
[22]
W. B. Mortenson, W. C. Miller, J. Boily, B. Steele, E. M. Crawford, and G. Desharnais, “Overarching principles and salient findings for inclusion in guidelines for power mobility use within residential care facilities,” Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 199–208, 2006.
[23]
W. B. Mortenson, W. C. Miller, J. Boily et al., “Perceptions of power mobility use and safety within residential facilities,” Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 142–152, 2005.
[24]
Rehabilitation Engineering & Assistive Technology Society of North America, Resna Position on the Application of Tilt, Recline, and Elevating Legrests for Wheelchairs, RESNA Press, Arlington, Va, USA, 2008, Contract No.: Document Number.
[25]
E. Trefler, S. G. Fitzgerald, D. A. Hobson, T. Bursick, and R. Joseph, “Outcomes of wheelchair systems intervention with residents of long-term care facilities,” Assistive Technology, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 18–27, 2004.
[26]
M. Kitchener, T. Ng, Y. L. Hyang, and C. Harrington, “Assistive technology in medicaid home- and community-based waiver programs,” Gerontologist, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 181–189, 2008.
