This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Wang RH, Korotchenko A, Hurd Clarke L, Mortenson WB, Mihailidis A. Power mobility with collision avoidance for older adults: User, caregiver, and prescriber perspectives. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(9):x–x. Slideshow Project DOI: /JRRD JSP Power mobility with collision avoidance for older adults: User, caregiver, and prescriber perspectives Rosalie H. Wang, BSc (OT), PhD; Alexandra Korotchenko, BHK, MA, PhD(c); Laura Hurd Clarke, MSW, PhD; W. Ben Mortenson, BSc (OT), MSc, PhD; Alex Mihailidis, PhD, PEng
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Wang RH, Korotchenko A, Hurd Clarke L, Mortenson WB, Mihailidis A. Power mobility with collision avoidance for older adults: User, caregiver, and prescriber perspectives. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(9):x–x. Slideshow Project DOI: /JRRD JSP Aim – Explore user, caregiver, and prescriber views on power mobility devices (PMDs) with collision avoidance (CA) technology. Relevance – CA technology can facilitate safer mobility for older PMD users with physical, sensory, and cognitive impairments. – Little is known about consumers’ perceptions of CA.
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Wang RH, Korotchenko A, Hurd Clarke L, Mortenson WB, Mihailidis A. Power mobility with collision avoidance for older adults: User, caregiver, and prescriber perspectives. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(9):x–x. Slideshow Project DOI: /JRRD JSP Method Qualitative research approach was used and thematic analysis was applied to analyze in- depth, semistructured interview data from: – 29 PMD users (aged 50+). – 5 caregivers. – 10 occupational therapists. Example of intelligent power wheelchair.
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Wang RH, Korotchenko A, Hurd Clarke L, Mortenson WB, Mihailidis A. Power mobility with collision avoidance for older adults: User, caregiver, and prescriber perspectives. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(9):x–x. Slideshow Project DOI: /JRRD JSP Results Data analysis identified 3 themes: – Useful situations or contexts. Driving backward, avoiding dynamic obstacles, negotiating outdoor barriers, and learning PMD use. – Technology design issues and real life application. Context awareness, reliability, and user interface specifications. – Appropriateness of collision avoidance technology for a variety of users.
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Wang RH, Korotchenko A, Hurd Clarke L, Mortenson WB, Mihailidis A. Power mobility with collision avoidance for older adults: User, caregiver, and prescriber perspectives. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(9):x–x. Slideshow Project DOI: /JRRD JSP Conclusion Most participants supported CA technology. – Saw benefits for current users and users with visual impairments. – Felt it might be unsuitable for people with significant cognitive impairments. Some participants voiced concerns regarding injury risk. Users expressed desire to maintain driving autonomy, which supports development of collaboratively controlled systems.