Date Presented 04/05/19
The purpose of this study was to determine the level of client satisfaction with device characteristics and service provision of custom-fabricated hand orthotics using the QUEST 2.0 questionnaire. The top three subcategories were comfort, effectiveness, and ease of use. Practitioners who prescribe orthoses should consider client preferences, as they may improve the client's experience and promote better intervention outcomes.
Primary Author and Speaker: August Mezzio Jr.
Additional Authors and Speakers: Miremonde Joseph, Rebecca Constant, Mallory Rickloff
Contributing Authors: Kristin Valdes
PURPOSE: Adherence, has been reported as the least controllable and unpredictable variable in treatment. Researchers and clinical professionals still experience issues with client non-adherence to orthotic treatment (Sandford, Barlow, & Lewis, 2008). The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to determine the level of client satisfaction with device characteristics and service provision of custom-fabricated hand orthotics using the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST) version 2.0 questionnaire.
METHODS: After approval from an institutional review board, participants for this study were obtained through a convenience sample from a hand rehabilitation clinic. Seventy-two participants were administered the QUEST 2.0 to evaluate their satisfaction regarding various aspects of their orthotic devices. The 12 satisfaction categories in the QUEST are dimensions, weight, adjustments, safety, durability, easy to use, comfort, effectiveness, service delivery, repairs/services, professional service, and follow-up service. Each question was scored on a 5-point Likert scale and then recorded in the following 3 sections: device, service, and total score. The mean and standard deviation were calculated for each of the 12 items to determine the primary determinants of orthotic satisfaction.
RESULTS: The top 3 categories for a participant’s orthotic device characteristics were comfort (81%), effectiveness (75%), and ease of use (74%). The participants’ mean score for the device section was 4.53. The mean service score was 4.71. The total mean score was 4.61.
CONCLUSION: This study approached orthotic intervention from an evidence-based and client-centered perspective. Therapists who are fabricating prescribed orthotic devices for individuals should consider comfort, effectiveness, and ease of use as they fabricate and adjust the device for their client. Providing clients with custom-fabricated orthotic devices may increase effective care and reduce costs as well as improve patient satisfaction and promote better outcomes (Chen et al., 2014; Mao et al., 2010). Identifying the client’s desired aspects of the device can help the therapist create a better therapeutic relationship with the client and may improve their overall experience receiving orthotic intervention.
References
Chen, C., Teng, Y., Lou, S., Lin, C., Chen, F., & Yeung, K. (2014). User satisfaction with orthotic devices and service in taiwan. PLoS ONE, 9(10), e110661. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0110661
Mao, H., Chen, W., Yao, G., Huang, S., Lin, C., & Huang, W. (2010). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (QUEST 2.0): The development of the taiwanese version. Clinical Rehabilitation, 24(5), 412-421. doi:10.1177/0269215509347438
Paterson, A. M., Bibb, R., Campbell, R. I., Bingham, G. (2015). Comparing additive manufacturing technologies for customised wrist splints. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 21(3), 230-243. doi:10.1108/RPJ-10-2013-0099
Sandford, F., Barlow, N., & Lewis, J. (2008). A study to examine patient adherence to wearing 24-hour forearm thermoplastic splints after tendon repairs. Journal of Hand Therapy, 21(1), 44-53. doi:10.1197/j.jht.2007.07.004
