Date Presented 04/13/21
Use of mainstream smart home technology (MSHT) as assistive technology (AT) is a potential, cost-effective intervention to increase independence and quality of life for persons with disabilities. This presentation provides results of a qualitative research study that will be used to guide the development of provision of MSHT as AT in a comprehensive service delivery model. To date, 15 professionals have participated in focus groups providing perspectives to guide the development of the model.
Primary Author and Speaker: Lindsey L. Morris
Additional Authors and Speakers: Angela Shierk, Arianne Joy V. Alfonso
Contributing Authors: Mauricio R. Delgado, Paul Yeatts
PURPOSE: Persons with physical disabilities (PwPD) frequently experience challenges with controlling and accessing their environment and require caregiver assistance to complete many of their daily activities. Traditional assistive technologies (AT) designed for PwPD, such as environmental control units (ECU) can increase participation and independence. However, several barriers limit the use and effectiveness of ECUs including their high-cost, increased training time, and need for ongoing maintenance and technical support (Brandt, Samuelsson, Töytäri, & Salminen, 2011). Mainstream smart home technologies (MSHT) are rapidly evolving, resulting in dynamic and affordable devices. Anecdotal reports reveal various disciplines are providing MSHTs as AT for PwPD (Waite, 2015). Research has shown the quality of the AT service delivery process is a key factor in determining the effectiveness of AT solutions in meeting PwPD's unique needs, abilities, and goals (MacLachlan & Scherer, 2018). There is a lack of empirical research regarding the service delivery models and the effectiveness of MSHT as AT for improving the participation and quality of life of PwPD (Ranada & Lidström, 2019). This study aims to gather information regarding the service delivery processes professionals from different disciplines use to provide MSHTs as AT for PwPD as the first step in the development of an innovative intervention protocol to support participation and independence.
DESIGN/METHODS: This IRB-approved study employs a qualitative methodology. Professionals with at least one year of experience providing MSHT as AT were recruited through the distribution of digital flyers to professional organizations representing AT and rehabilitation professionals and to individuals with expertise identified through journal publications and internet research. Participants provided verbal consent and were interviewed individually or in a focus group of 2-3 participants, based on their availability and professional discipline. The interviews were conducted via Zoom with slides displayed as visuals to help provide a semi-structured format and guide the discussion. The interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis of the transcripts will be completed separately by research members and then reviewed for consensus to identify major and sub-themes.
RESULTS: This research study is currently in progress. To date, interview sessions have been completed with 15 professionals of various disciplines and roles including: Independent Living Specialists, Smart Home Technology Consultants, Assistive Technology Professionals, State AT Program Directors, Occupational, Physical, and Speech Therapists. Thus far, participants have provided services using MSHT as AT in inpatient, outpatient, or community- based settings. Preliminary analyses reveal topics including evaluation methods, device selection, installation, set-up and personalization, device training and education methods, outcomes and measures, funding sources, and the benefits and barriers to utilizing MSHT as AT for PwPD.
CONCLUSION: This study will address gaps in the literature regarding the service delivery models used to provide MSHT as AT and identify future research needs. The results of this study have the potential to inform the development a cost-effective service delivery model for the provision of MSHT as AT and intervention for enabling environmental control for PwPD. The use of MSHT as AT to improve participation and health of PwPD is an emerging area of research and intervention used in practice which is well suited for OT given their existing presence in the provision of AT and home modification interventions and their holistic approach necessary for considering PwPD unique patterns and needs.
References
Brandt, A., Samuelsson, K., Töytäri, O., & Salminen, A.-L. (2011). Activity and participation, quality of life and user satisfaction outcomes of environmental control systems and smart home technology: A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 6(3), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2010.532286
Waite, A. (2015). Using the OT brain to implement smart home technology. OT Practice 20(16), 8–11.
MacLachlan, M., & Scherer, M. J. (2018). Systems thinking for assistive technology: A commentary on the GREAT summit. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 13(5), 492–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2018.1472306
Ranada, Å L., & Lidström, H. (2019). Satisfaction with assistive technology device in relation to the service delivery process-A systematic review. Assistive Technology, 31(2), 82–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2017.1367737
