Powered-wheelchair use improves participation for people with mobility limitations; however, many individuals do not receive powered-wheelchair skills training that meets their learning needs.
Purpose.
The aim of this work is to evaluate the feasibility of a powered-wheelchair training program for older adults with cognitive impairment, using errorless learning strategies facilitated by shared control technology.
Method.
A feasibility 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial will recruit 32 older adults in residential care with mild to moderate cognitive impairment who are new powered-wheelchair use. The intervention consists of six or 12 training sessions, facilitated by shared control technology, using errorless learning techniques. Control participants will receive six or 12 training sessions using trial-and-error methods. Feasibility and clinical outcomes data (primary outcome: powered-wheelchair skills) will be collected.
Implications.
Errorless learning facilitated by shared control technology may be an alternative to meet the powered-wheelchair learning needs of older adults with cognitive impairments.
AkhtarS.MoulinC. J. A.BowieP. C. W. (2006). Are people with mild cognitive impairment aware of the benefits of errorless learning?Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 16, 329–346. doi:10.1080/09602010500176674
2.
AugerC.DemersL.GélinasI.RouthierF.MortensonW. B.MillerW. C. (2010). Reliability and validity of telephone administration of the Wheelchair Outcome Measure for middle-aged and older users of power mobility devices. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 42, 574–581. doi:10.2340/16501977-0557
3.
BackmanL. (1992). Memory training and memory improvement in Alzheimer’s disease: Rules and exceptions. Acta Neurological Scandinavia, 139, 84–89.
4.
BaddeleyA.WilsonB. A. (1994). When implicit learning fails: Amnesia and the problem of error elimination. Neuropsychologia, 32(1), 53–68.
5.
BillinghamS. A. M.WhiteheadA. L.JuliousS. A. (2013). An audit of sample sizes for pilot and feasibility trials being undertaken in the United Kingdom registered in the United Kingdom Clinical Research Network database. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13, Article 104. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-104
6.
BrandtÅ.IwarssonS.StåhleA. (2004). Older people’s use of powered wheelchairs for activity and participation. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 36, 70–77. doi:10.1080/16501970310017432
7.
CanningB.SanchezG. (2004). Innovations in practice: Considering powered mobility for individuals with stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 11(2), 84–88.
8.
CullenB.O’NeillB.EvansJ. J. (2008). Neuropsychological predictors of powered wheelchair use: A prospective follow-up study. Clinical Rehabilitation, 22, 836–46. doi:10.1177/0269215508091873
9.
DavisL. A. (2005). Educating individuals with dementia. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, 21, 304–314. doi:10.1097/00013614-200510000-00007
10.
DawsonD.ChanR.KaisermanE. (1994). Development of the Power-Mobility Indoor Driving Assessment for residents of long-term care facilities: A preliminary report. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 61, 269–276. doi:10.1177/000841749406100507
11.
DechampsA.FasottiL.JungheimJ.LeoneE.DoodE.AlliouxA.…KesselsR. P. C. (2011). Effects of different learning methods for instrumental activities of daily living in patients with Alzheimer’s dementia: A pilot study. American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Dementias, 26, 273–281. doi:10.1177/1533317511404394
12.
DonagheyC. L.McMillanT. M.O’NeillB. (2010). Errorless learning is superior to trial and error when learning a practical skill in rehabilitation: A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation, 24, 195–201. doi:10.1177/0269215509353270
13.
FerlandM. B.LarenteJ.RowlandJ.DavidsonP. S. R. (2013). Errorless (re)learning of daily living routines by a woman with impaired memory and initiation: Transferrable to a new home?Brain Injury, 27, 1461–1469. doi:10.3109/02699052.2013.823661
14.
FieldD. (1999). Powered mobility: A literature review illustrating the importance of a multifaceted approach. Assistive Technology, 11(1), 20–33. doi:10.1080/10400435.1999.10131982
15.
FomiattiR.RichmondJ.MoirL.MillsteedJ. (2013). A systematic review of the impact of powered mobility devices on older adults’ activity engagement. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics, 31, 297–309. doi:10.3109/02703181.2013.846451
16.
FortinM.HudonC.DuboisM.-F.AlmirallJ.LapointeL.SoubhiH. (2005). Comparative assessment of three different indices of multimorbidity for studies on health-related quality of life. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 3, Article 74. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-3-74
17.
FurlongW.TorranceG. W.FeenyD. (1994). Properties of Health Utilities Index: Preliminary evidence. Quality of Life Newsletter, 13/14, 3, 4, 10.
18.
GiesbrechtE. M.MillerW. C. (2013, June). Development of the wheeling while talking test. Paper presentation at the Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America Conference, Bellevue, WA.
19.
GreenbergS. A. (2007). The Geriatric Depression Scale: Short form. American Journal of Nursing, 107, 60–69. doi:10.1097/01.NAJ.0000292204.52313.f3
20.
GreerN.BrasureM.WiltT. (2012). Wheeled mobility (wheelchair) service delivery: Scope of the evidence. Annals of Internal Medicine, 156(2), 141–146.
21.
GrollD. L.ToT.BombardierC.WrightJ. G. (2005). The development of a comorbidity index with physical function as the outcome. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58, 595–602. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.018
22.
HallK.PartnoyJ.TenenbaumS.DawsonD. R. (2005). Power mobility driving training for seniors: A pilot study. Assistive Technology, 17(1), 47–56. doi:10.1080/10400435.2005.10132095
23.
HertzogM. A. (2008). Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Research in Nursing & Health, 31(2), 180–191. doi:10.1002/nur.20247
24.
HorsmanJ.FurlongW.FeenyD.TorranceG. (2003). The Health Utilities Index (HUI): Concepts, measurement properties and applications. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 1, 54. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-54
25.
HsiehH.-F.ShannonS. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277–1288. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687
26.
HubbardG.DownsM. G.TesterS. (2003). Including older people with dementia in research: Challenges and strategies. Aging & Mental Health, 7(5), 351–362. doi:10.1080/1360786031000150685
27.
KarmarkarA. M.DiciannoB. E.GrahamJ. E.CooperR.KelleherA.CooperR. A. (2012). Factors associated with provision of wheelchairs in older adults. Assistive Technology, 24, 155–167. doi:10.1080/10400435.2012.659795
28.
KirbyR. L.CoughlanS. G.ChristieM. (1995). Could changes in the wheelchair delivery system improve safety?Canadian Medical Association Journal, 153, 1585–1591.
LofqvistC.PetterssonC.IwarssonS.BrandtA. (2012). Mobility and mobility-related participation outcomes of powered wheelchair and scooter interventions after 4-months and 1-year use. Disability & Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 7, 211–218. doi:10.3109/17483107.2011.619244
31.
MiddletonE. L.SchwartzM. F. (2012). Errorless learning in cognitive rehabilitation: A critical review. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 22(2), 1–24. doi:10.1080/09602011.2011.639619
32.
MimuraM.KomatsuS. (2007). Cognitive rehabilitation and cognitive training for mild dementia. Psychogeriatrics, 7(3), 137–143. doi:10.1111/j.1479-8301.2007.00212.x
33.
MortensonW.ClarkeL.BestK. (2013). Prescribers’ experiences with powered mobility prescription among older adults. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67, 100–107.
34.
MortensonW.MillerW. C.BackmanC. L.OliffeJ. L. (2011). Predictors of mobility among wheelchair using residents in long-term care. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 92, 1587–1593. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2011.03.032
35.
MortensonW. B.MillerW. C.BoilyJ.SteeleB.CrawfordE. M.DesharnaisG. (2006). Overarching principles and salient findings for inclusion in guidelines for power mobility use within residential care facilities. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 43(2), 199–208.
36.
MortensonW. B.MillerW. C.Miller-PolgarJ. (2007). Measuring wheelchair intervention outcomes: Development of the wheelchair outcome measure. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 2, 275–285. doi:10.1080/17483100701475863
37.
MountainA. D.KirbyR. L.EskesG. A.SmithC.DuncanH.MacLeodD. A.ThompsonK. (2010). Ability of people with stroke to learn powered wheelchair skills: A pilot study. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91, 596–601. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2009.12.011
38.
NasreddineZ. S.PhillipsN. A.BédirianV.CharbonneauS.WhiteheadV.CollinI.…ChertkowH. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 695–699. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x
39.
ParmeleeP. A.LawtonM. P.KatzI. R. (1989). Psychometric properties of the Geriatric Depression Scale among the institutionalized aged. Psychological Assessment, 1, 331–338. doi:10.1037//1040-3590.1.4.331
40.
PetterssonI.TörnquistK.AhlströmG. (2006). The effect of an outdoor powered wheelchair on activity and participation in users with stroke. Disability & Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 1, 235–243. doi:10.1080/17483100600757841
41.
RushtonP. W.DemersL.MillerW. C., & CanWheel Research Team. (2012, October). Measurement properties of the Wheelchair Use Confidence Scale for Power Wheelchair Users (WheelCon-P). Paper presented at the Canadian Association on Gerontology Conference, Vancouver, BC.
42.
SabolT. P.HaleyE. S. (2006). Wheelchair evaluation for the older adult. Clinics in Geriatric Medicine, 22, 355–375.
43.
SakakibaraB. M.MillerW. C.RushtonP. W.PolgarJ. M. (2018). Rasch analyses of the Wheelchair Use Confidence Scale for Power Wheelchair Users. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 99, 17–25. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2017.09.004
44.
SalminenA.-L.BrandtA.SamuelssonK.TöytäriO.MalmivaaraA. (2009). Mobility devices to promote activity and participation: A systematic review. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 41, 697–706. doi:10.2340/16501977-0427
45.
ShieldsM. (2004). Use of wheelchairs and other mobility support devices. Health Reports, 15(3), 37–41.
46.
SmithE.KenyonL.FieldD.MillerW. (2017, February/March). Powered wheelchair provision: Current practices and opportunities. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual International Seating Symposium, Nashville, TN.
47.
SmithE.RismaniS.MortensonW.MillerW. (in press). “A chance to try:” Exploring the clinical utility of shared control teleoperation for powered wheelchair assessment and training. American Journal of Occupational Therapy.
48.
ThabaneL.MaJ.ChuR.ChengJ.IsmailaA.RiosL. P.…GoldsmithC. H. (2010). A tutorial on pilot studies: The what, why and how. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10, 1. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-10 -1
49.
TombaughT. N.McIntyreN. J. (1992). The Mini-Mental State Examination: A comprehensive review. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 40(9), 922–935.
50.
De VreeseL.NeriM. (2001). Memory rehabilitation in Alzheimer’s disease: A review of progress. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 16, 794–809.
