Scoping review of economic evaluations of assistive technology globally

Evaluation of providers' assistive technology service delivery practices in Pakistan

PURPOSE

Globally, one in three individuals needs at least one assistive product. The primary objective of this study was to conduct a survey of Pakistani rehabilitation service providers to determine what proportion provide assistive technology and if their characteristics (including geographical region, education, and experience) are associated with adherence to the service delivery process. The secondary objective was to determine if individuals that provide assistive technology adhere to a standard assistive technology service delivery process. The tertiary objective was to determine if the providers that adhered to a standard delivery process had characteristics that differed from the rest of the service providers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey composed of multiple-choice questions was distributed to physiotherapists, community-based healthcare workers, and related rehabilitation professions through a convenience sampling method. SPSS Statistics was used to develop correlation matrices to determine Pearson's coefficient of number of steps, education level, experience level and continuing education received.

RESULTS

There were 71 respondents from 4 Pakistani provinces. 53.5% of respondents stated they provide assistive technology. There was participation in most steps of the service delivery process. There is weak correlation between number of steps and education level, number of steps and experience level, and number of steps and continuing education received.

CONCLUSIONS

While the majority of respondents provide assistive technology, a significant proportion (46.5%) don't. This may suggest there is a need for additional advocacy and awareness raising of the benefits of and how to access assistive technology in Pakistan.

Calculating the social impact of home automation for people with disability: A social return on investment study

INTRODUCTION

Home automation can deliver important outcomes for people with disabilities, including enhanced independence. Despite the millions of dollars spent on home automation in Australia and other developed nations, to date, there has been no economic evaluation of this type of assistive technology.

METHOD

A social return on investment analysis of home automation study was undertaken. Primary data were collected using qualitative interviews with home automation consumers and other key stakeholders, including occupational therapists, a spinal rehabilitation physician, peer support advocate, and managers and technical personnel from home automation providers (n = 17). The analysis was supported by (1) secondary data from a scoping review on outcomes from home automation and (2) additional literature searches to identify suitable financial proxies and to make estimates of the proportion of home automation users expected to experience each outcome. A scenario approach was used with three home automation scenarios developed with increasing complexity and costs to calculate the social return on investment.

RESULTS

Eight outcomes from the use of home automation were identified, including reduced reliance on carers and family members, increased independence, and improved energy and comfort. The social return on investment ranged from $38.80 (low cost) to $15.10 (high cost) for every $1 invested across a 10-year benefit period, with the financial proxy for reduced care attendant hours contributing the most to the social return ratio. Even the highest cost scenario was repaid in social value within the first year of the benefit period.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that home automation represents a sound investment and has a significant impact on the overall quality of life of people with disabilities. Focusing on the financial savings in care attendant hours alone should be compelling evidence for funders to recognise home automation's value and continue to fund this assistive technology.

CONSUMER AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

A consumer representative was a member of the project steering group, which supported the research team at all stages of the project.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

When people get injured, their disability can stop them doing things around the home that they used to be able to do. Technology can help people with disabilities do things like open and close doors and turn off taps by pressing a button, so they do not have to wait for someone to help them. This technology can be expensive, but no one has looked at if it is worth the money. We spoke to some people with disabilities who used this type of technology, and they told us their lives were better now they used this technology. For example, they told us they were able to do things for themselves, they did not need carers as much, and they had better mental health. We spoke to businesses about the costs of different types of technology that can be used in the home. We then put a dollar value on the ways people with disabilities told us their lives were better. For example, for better mental health, we worked out how much it would cost to see a psychologist for 1 year. We found that the dollar value of the ways in which people with disabilities' lives were improved was at least 15 times more than the costs of the technology. This study therefore shows that this technology is worth the money and improves the lives of people with disabilities following serious injury.

The impact of assistive living technology on perceived independence of people with a physical disability in executing daily activities: a systematic literature review

PURPOSE

People with physical disabilities often require lifetime support and experience challenges to maintain or (re)define their level of independence. Assistive living technologies (ALT) are promising to increase independent living and execution of activities of daily living (ADL). This paper provides a systematic literature review that aims to analyse the present state of the literature about the impact of ALT on perceived independence of people with a physical disability receiving long-term care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Databases Embase, Medline, and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies from 2010 or later.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included, of which seven qualitative, one quantitative, and one mixed methods. Quality was generally high. ALT enabled participants to execute ADL. We found six themes for the impact of ALT on perceived independence: feeling enabled, choice and control, feeling secure, time alone, feeling less needy, and participation.

CONCLUSIONS

ALT appears to impact perceived independence in many ways, exceeding merely the executional aspect of independence. Existing research is limited and quite one-sided. More large-scale studies are needed in order to inform care organisations how to implement ALT, especially considering societal developments and challenges impacting long-term care.