Page 111 - Handbook of Electronic Assistive Technology

98 HANDBOOK OF ELECTRONIC ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY

Psychological Impact of Assistive Devices Scale

This is a 26-item scale that measures the quality of life impacts of using ATs from a per-
son with a disability’s point of view (Jutai and Day, 2002). The scale is multidimensional
and comprised of three main categories. One is competence, which includes the effect of
the device on functional independence, performance and productivity. Another category
is adaptability, which includes the enabling and liberating effects of AT. The last is self-
esteem, which relates to the extent that AT has affected self-esteem, self-confidence and
emotional well-being. The Psychological Impact of Assistive Devices Scale is reported to
be sensitive to variables such as clinical condition, device stigma and functional features
of the device and it provides an indication of the abandonment or retention of the device
(Day et al., 2002).
Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction With Assistive Technology

This is an outcome measure that assesses user satisfaction with two components: the
device and the service delivery. The first eight items require the user to score the device
based on its weight, safety, simplicity of use, comfort, adjustment, durability and effective-
ness. The latter four items are about the user scoring the service and include service deliv-
ery, professionalism of the service, repairs and service of the device and follow-up service.
The users score their satisfaction on a five-point scale from not satisfied to very satisfied.
At the end the users are asked to identify three main items relating to the device that are
more important for them (Demers et al., 1996).

Therapy Outcome Measures System
This is an 11-point scale that is comprised of four domains of impairment, activity, partici-
pation and well-being. The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists (RCSLT) in
the United Kingdom launched a project to support their speech and language therapists
in measuring the effectiveness of their services. In 2013 phase one of this project appraised
60 outcome measures, frameworks and systems commonly used by speech and language
therapists against set criteria. Therapy Outcome Measures for Rehabilitation Professionals
(Enderby et al., 2006) was selected as the best fit. In 2015 the RCSLT Council approved the
development of an online tool to support the collection of data. This is known as RSCLT
On Line Tool. Following this, the AAC services in the United Kingdom formed a working
party to consider using the AAC Therapy Outcome Measures System. This is still in early
stages; however, having a standardised outcome measurement tool across all specialist
services will enable benchmarking and comparison of different patient groups that have
always been difficult due to lack of consistency in data collection. Differences in practice,
however, may have an impact on data gathering, i.e., some services review their service
users and address any issues identified at the early stages of their intervention and some
services rely on others to inform them if a reassessment is required. The point at which this
intervention is measured may therefore be different for each service leading to inconsis-
tency in data collection.