Consumer Satisfaction with Telerehabilitation Service Provision of Alternative Computer Access and Augmentative and Alternative Communication

Edmund F. LoPresti, Andrew Jinks, Richard C. Simpson

Abstract


Telerehabilitation (TR) services for assistive technology evaluation and training have the potential to reduce travel demands for consumers and assistive technology professionals while allowing evaluation in more familiar, salient environments for the consumer. Sixty-five consumers received TR services for augmentative and alternative communication or alternative computer access, and consumer satisfaction was compared with twenty-eight consumers who received exclusively in-person services. TR recipients rated their TR services at a median of 6 on a 6-point Likert scale TR satisfaction questionnaire, although individual responses did indicate room for improvement in the technology. Overall satisfaction with AT services was rated highly by both in-person (100% satisfaction) and TR (99% satisfaction) service recipients.


References


Allegretti, A., Schein, R., Schmeler, M., & Brienza, D. (2011). Using Telerehabilitation to Educate Remote Therapists in Prescribing Wheeled Mobility and Seating Devices. Proceedings of the 27th International Seating Symposium. Nashville, TN.

Anderson, K., Boisvert, M.K., Doneski-Nichol, J., Gutmann M.L., Hall, N.C., Morelock, C., Steele, R., Cohn, E.R. (2012). Tele-AAC resolution. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 4, 79-82.

Anderson, K., Balandin, S., & Stancliffe, R. (2014). Australian parents’ experiences of speech generating device (SGD) service delivery. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 17, 75-83. doi:10.3109/17518423.2013.857735

ASHA. (2006). ASHA Speech-Language Pathology Health Care Survey Issue Briefs: Vacancies. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.

ASHA. (2002). Survey report on telepractice use among audiologists and speech-language pathologists. Rockville, MD: American Speech Language Hearing Association.

Banes, D. (2015). Remote assessment In Assistive Technology. Retrieved from European Commission: JoinUp: http://www.epractice.eu/en/cases/rapl

Brennan, D., Georgeadis, A., Baron, C., & Barker, L. (2004). The effect of videoconference-based telerehabilitation on story retelling performance by brain-injured subjects and its implications for remote speech-language therapy. Telemedicine Journal and e-Health, 10, 147-154.

Brennan, D., Tindall, L., Theodoros, D., Brown, J., Campbell, M., Christiana, D., . . . Lee, A. (2010). A Blueprint for Telerehabilitation Guidelines. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 2, 31-34.

Burns, R., Crislip, D., Daviou, P., Temkin, A., Vesmarovich, S., Anshutz, J., . . . Jones, M. (1998). Using telerehabilitation to support assistive technology. Assistive Technology, 10, 126-33.

Burns, R., Hauber, R., & Vesmarovich, S. (2000). Telerehabilitation: Continuing cases and new applications. RESNA 2000 Annual Conference. Orlando, FL.

Dobransky K, H. E. (2006). The disability divide in Internet access and use. Information, Communication & Society, 9, 313-334.

Donegan, M. (2002). The TELENET project summary final report. Oxford, England: ACE Centre.

Duffy JR, W. G. (1997). Telemedicine and the diagnosis of speech and language disorders. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 72, 1116-1122.

Federici, S. B. (2014). Providing assistive technology in Italy: The perceived delivery process quality as affecting abandonment. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology. doi:10.3109/17483107.2014.930191

Grogan-Johnson, S. A. (2010). A pilot study comparing the effectiveness of speech language therapy provided by telemedicine with conventional on-site therapy. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 16, 134-139.

Hazell, G., & Colven, D. (2001). ACE Centre Telesupport for loan equipment. Oxford: ACE Centre.

Johnson, J., Inglebret, E., Jones, C., & Ray, J. (2006). Perspectives of speech language pathologists regarding success versus abandonment of AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 85-99.

Kairy, D., Lehoux, P., & Vincent, C. (2009). A systematic review of clinical outcomes, clinical process, healthcare utilization and costs associated with telerehabilitation. Disability Rehabilitation, 31, 427-447.

Kim, J., Brienza, D., Lynch, R., Cooper, R., & Boninger, M. (2008). Effectiveness evaluation of a remote accessibility assessment system for wheelchair users using virtualized reality. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 89, 470-479.

Lysley, A., Colven, D., & Donegan, M. (1999). CATCHNET final report. Oxford, England: ACE Centre.

Mashima, P. A. (2008). Overview of telehealth activities in speech-language pathology. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 1101-1117.

McCue, M., Fairman, A., & Pramuka, M. (2010). Enhancing quality of life through telerehabilitation. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 21, 195– 205.

Panek, P., & Zagler, W. (2001). Remote service of rehabilitation technology final report. Vienna, Austria: Vienna University of Technology.

Panek, P., Beck, C., Hochgatterer, A., Mina, S., Prazak, B., Seisenbacher, G., . . . Zagler, W. (2002). Tele-help and remote service provision using RESORT prototype system. 8th International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs. Linz, Austria.

Parmanto, B., Saptono A., Pramana G., Pulantara, W., Schein R.M., Schmeler M.R., McCue M.P., Brienza, D.M. (2010). VISYTER: Versatile and integrated system for telerehabilitation. Telemedicine and e-Health, 16, 939-944.

Parmanto, B., Saptono, A., Murthi, R., Safos, C., & Lathan, C. (2008). Secure telemonitoring system for delivering telerehabilitation therapy to enhance children's communication function to home. Telemedicine and e-Health, 14, 905-911.

Riemer-Reiss, M., & Wacker R.R. (2000). Factors associated with assistive technology discontinuance among individuals with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation, 66(3), 44-50.

Saptono, A. (2008). Online portal as a solution to deliver rich collaboration features in telerehabilitation. American Telemedicine Association 13th Annual International Meeting. Seattle, Washington.

Scherer MJ, J. J. (2007). A framework for modelling the selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs). Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 2, 1-8.

Scherer, M. (2014). From people-centered to person-centered services, and back again. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 9(1), 1-2. doi:10.3109/17483107.2013.870239

Schmeler, M., Schein, R., McCue, M., & Betz, K. (2009). Telerehabilitation clinical and vocational applications for assistive technology: research, opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 1, 59-72.

Schutte, J., Gales, S., Filipponi, A., Saptono, A., Parmanto, B., & McCue, M. (2012). Evaluation of a telerehabilitation system for community-based rehabilitation. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 4(1), 15-24.

Stevenson, B., & McQuivey, J. (2015). The wide range of abilities and its impact on computer technology. Retrieved from http://www.microsoft.com/enable/research/phase1.aspx

Theodoros, D. (2011). Telepractice in speech language pathology: The evidence, the challenges, and the future. Perspectives on Telepractice, 1, 10-21.

Towey, M. (2012). Speech telepractice: Installing a speech therapy upgrade for the 21st century. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 4(2), 73-78. doi:10.5195/ijt.2012.6112

Woolf, C., Caute, A., Haigh, Z., Galliers, J., Wilson, S., Kessie, A., . . . Marshall, J. (2015). A comparison of remote therapy, face to face therapy and an attention control intervention for people with aphasia: A quasi-randomised controlled feasibility study. Clinical Rehabilitation. doi:10.1177/0269215515582074

World Health Organization & World Bank. (2011). World report on disability. Malta: World Health Organization. Retrieved from http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789240685215_eng.pdf

Yorkston, K., Beukelman, D., & Traynor, C. (1984). Assessment of intelligibility of dysarthric speech. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2015.6180

  

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.