PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9141127

Powered wheelchairs: are we enabling or disabling?

Abstract

Following the unsuccessful issue of three powered indoor National Health Service (NHS) wheelchairs, a survey was carried out of 40 users in a London wheelchair service to identify the problems with issue and possible areas for improvement to practice. The survey identified improvements that were necessary both from the service and the manufacturers' booklets. The improvements include the issue of written instructions and information to complement verbal instruction given at handover. Such information should be as interesting to read as possible, make use of appropriate language and diagrams (especially in area where English is often not the first language), colour, text and print size to maximise comprehension to these severely disabled users and often their elderly relatives or carers. The importance of the role of the rehabilitation engineer in training the user, giving instruction at handover and annual review are highlighted to ensure that the equipment remains working, suitable and up to date for the individual's needs. Training in interpersonal and communication skills and the importance of recall should also be emphasised. The implementation of the findings should lead to increasing contact with the service by the user, reduction in repair and replacement costs, regular review, correct supply and will therefore enable users to increase their independence with appropriate equipment.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S Beaumont-White, R O Ham. 1997. Powered wheelchairs: are we enabling or disabling?. https://doi.org/10.3109/03093649709164531

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

On health, ability and activity: comments on some basic notions in the ICF.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to highlight and at the same time criticize the holistic view of health expressed in the "International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)". Particular attention will be paid to the idea suggested in the ICF that not only the ability to perform a specified action but also its actual performance is included in the person's health. My argument intends to show that this is an untenable position. METHOD: The theoretical platform of this paper is philosophical action theory. My argument makes particular use of the distinctions between ability, opportunity, activity and will. My analysis also uses some insights from the contemporary philosophical discussion of health concepts. CONCLUSIONS: Ability (or capacity) and its opposite disability (or incapacity) are essential ingredients in the implicit philosophy of health of the ICF. However, the ICF also puts an emphasis on the actual performance of actions. This is entailed by the performance qualifier that is included in the ICF. I give some arguments for questioning the relevance of this qualifier if it is intended to have a place in the concept of health or have a general function for decisions in health care or rehabilitation. Instead I suggest the introduction of an opportunity qualifier, which could fulfill some of the purposes intended for the performance qualifier.

Persons with Disabilities↗