This study investigated the musculoskeletal consequences of using travel aids, particularly white canes and dog guides, as perceived by 21 individuals, aged 27 to 68 years, who are visually impaired or blind. These individuals experienced a variety of negative physical effects that they either denied, ignored, or minimized because of the fundamental biophysical, psychological, and social benefits derived from being independently mobile and because of the need to attend to environmental cues to ensure safe travel. The implications of these findings for mobility training and future research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaileyI.L., & HallA. (1990). Visual impairment: An overview.New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
2.
BataviaA.I., & HammerG. S. (1990). Toward the development of consumer-based criteria for the evaluation of assistive devices.Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 27, 425–436.
3.
Chaisson-StewartG.M. (1983). Handi-dogs help the handicapped.Geriatric Nursing, 4, 365–368.
4.
CrewsJ.E. (1991). Strategic planning and independent living for elders who are blind.Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 85, 52.
5.
DeanS. (1987). Canine topics: New directions for guide dogs.The Veterinary Record, 121, 500.
6.
Demographics update: Alternate estimate of the number of guide dog users. (1995). Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, JVIB News Service, 89(2), 4.
7.
Demographics update: Use of “white” (“long”) canes. (1994). Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, JVIB News Service, 88(1), 4–5.
8.
DePoyE., & GitlinL.N. (1994). Introduction to. research: Multiple strategies for health and human services.St. Louis: Mosby Year Book.
9.
EamesE., & EamesT. (1989). A comparison of the guide dog movements of England and the United States.Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 83, 215–218.
10.
GordonA., & HorowitzA. (1995). The lighthouse national survey on vision loss: The experience, attitudes and knowledge of middle–aged and older Americans.New York: The Lighthouse Inc.
11.
GubaE.G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries.Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29, 75–91.
12.
HojatM., SamuelS., & ThompsonT.L. (1995). Searching for the lost key under the light of biomedicine: A triangular biopsy-chosocial paradigm may cast additional light on medical education, research and patient care. In MajumdarS.K., RosenfeldL.M., NashD.B., & AudetA.M. (Eds.), Medicine and health care into the twenty-first century (pp. 310–325). The Pennsylvania Academy of Science.
13.
KaufertJ.M., KaufertP.A., LockerD. (1987). After the epidemic: The long-term impact of poliomyelitis. In CoburnD., (Eds.), Health and Canadian Society (pp. 345–362). Toronto: Fitzhenry and Whiting.
14.
KendallF.P., & McCrearyE.K. (1983). Muscles: Testing and function (3rd ed.). (pp. 270–271). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
15.
KleinK.K., BuddO., WelchP., HammittT., & DyoK. (1973). The effects of lateral postural balancing on gait patterns of blind subjects.American Corrective Therapy Journal, 27, 13–16.
16.
KoestlerF.A. (1976). The unseen minority: Social history of blindness in the U.S.New York: David McKay.
17.
KnowlB.W., RoozendaalC., Van Den BogaardL., & BouwJ. (1988). The suitability of dogs as guide dogs for the blind: Criteria and testing procedures.Veterinary Quarterly, 10(3), 198–204.
18.
KrugerR.A. (1988). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19.
LambertR.M. (1990). Some thoughts about acquiring and learning to use a guide dog.RE:view, 22, 151–158.
20.
LaPlanteM.P., HendershotG.E., & MossA.J. (1992). Assistive technology devices and home accessibility features: Prevalence, payment, need and trends.Advance data from vital and health statistics, no. 217, Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.
21.
LuborskyM.R. (1994). The identification and analysis of themes and patterns. In GubriumJ.F., & SankarA. (Eds.), Qualitative methods in aging research (pp. 189–210). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
LydonW.T., McGrawM.L. (1973). Concept development for visually handicapped children.New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
23.
MannW.C., HurrenD., KaruzaJ., & BentleyD.W. (1993). Needs of home-based older visually impaired persons for assistive devices.Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 87, 106–110.
24.
MorrisW. (Ed.). (1973). American heritage dictionary of the English language.New York: Houghton Mifflin.
25.
MorseA.R., SilbermanR., & TriefE. (1987). Aging and visual impairment.Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 81, 308–312.
26.
PutnamP. (April 1955). The miracle of a blind man and his dog.New York Times Magazine, 22.
27.
RathWW., & RathJ.D. (1992). Prevention of musculoskeletal injury. In RothmanJ., & LevineR. (Eds.), Prevention practice: Strategies for physical therapy and occupational therapy.Philadelphia: Saunders.
28.
RozenstainS.A. (1984). Please don't pet my dog!Your Life Health, 99(3), 14–15.
29.
SchmollB.J. (1993). Qualitative research. In BorkC. E. (Ed.), Research in physical therapy.Philadelphia: Lippincott.
30.
ScrantonP.E., ClarkM.W., & McCloskyS.J. (1978). Musculoskeletal problems in blind children.Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 60A, 363–365.
31.
SiegelI.M., & TurnerM. (1965). Postural training for the blind.Physical Therapy, 45, 683–686.
32.
TurnerM., & SiegelI.M. (1969). Physical therapy for the blind child.Physical Therapy.49, 1357–1363.
33.
TurnerT. (1989). Small animal topics: Guide dogs and the profession.The Veterinary Record.125(26–27), 635.
34.
United States Department of Health and Human Services. (1977). National Health Interview Survey.Washington, DC: Author.
35.
United States Department of Health and Human Services. (1990). National Health Interview Survey.Washington DC: Author.
36.
VaughanD., & AsburyT. (1986). Blindness. In VaughanD., & AsburyT. (Eds.), General ophthalmology (11th ed.) (pp. 367–371). Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
37.
WainapelS.F., KwonY.S., & FazzariP.J. (1989). Severe visual impairment on a rehabilitation unit: Incidence and implication.Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 70, 439–41.
38.
WatsonG.R., BeckS., De l'AuneW., StelmackJ., & MainoJ. (July 1999). A national survey of the impact of low vision prosthetic device use among veterans. Project No. C639-RA. Decatur, GA: Rehabilitation Research and Development Center, Atlanta Medical Center.
