This study evaluated the health-promoting effects of assistive technology(AT) from a holistic health perspective with the data from the rapid Assistive Technology Assessment (rATA) survey conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) in China in 2021. Through a generalized ordered logit regression, we found that AT mainly aids in the reduction of “severe impairment” in basic activities of daily living (BADL) and facilitates the attainment of “minimal impairment” in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), indicating that AT at the current stage not only serves as a tool to maintain basic survival, but also plays a crucial role in promoting overall health. Further research ascertained that the effects of assistive technology on BADL and IADL bear resemblances between two age groups but differ between urban and rural residents. Consequently, efforts must be made to enhance the supply system of AT, thereby improving social well-being for all.
AgreeE. M.FreedmanV. A. (2011). A quality-of-life scale for assistive technology: Results of a pilot study of aging and technology. Physical Therapy, 91(12), 1780–1788. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20100375
2.
AgreeE. M.FreedmanV. A.SenguptaM. (2004). Factors influencing the use of mobility technology in community-based long-term care. Journal of Aging and Health, 16(2), 267–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264303262623
3.
AlbertS. M.Bear LehmanJ.BurkhardtA. (2009). Lifestyle-adjusted function: Variation beyond BADL and IADL competencies. The Gerontologist, 49(6), 767–777. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnp064
4.
AndersonW. L.WienerJ. M. (2015). The impact of assistive technologies on formal and informal home care. The Gerontologist, 55(3), 422–433. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnt165
5.
BotelhoF. H. F. (2021). Childhood and assistive technology: Growing with opportunity, developing with technology. Assistive Technology, 33(sup1), 87–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2021.1971330
6.
BradleyS. M.HernandezC. R. (2011). Geriatric assistive devices. American Family Physician, 84(4), 405–411.
7.
BrownS.VairisA.MasoumifarA. M.PetousisM. (2020). Common problems with the conventional design of crutches: Proposing a safer design and discussing the potential impact. Technology in Society, 60(5), 101215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101215
8.
ColemanM. B. (2011). Successful implementation of assistive technology to promote access to curriculum and instruction for students with physical disabilities. Physical Disabilities: Education and Related Services, 30(1), 2–22.
9.
CowanR. E.FreglyB. J.BoningerM. L.ChanL.RodgersM. M.ReinkensmeyerD. J. (2012). Recent trends in assistive technology for mobility. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 9(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-9-20
10.
da SilvaA. P.Bulle OliveiraA. S.Pinheiro BezerraI. M.Pedrozo Campos AntunesT.Guerrero DaboinB. E.RaimundoR. D.Dos SantosV. R.de AbreuL. C. (2017). Low cost assistive technology to support educational activities for adolescents with cerebral palsy. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 13(7), 676–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2017.1369590
11.
DemersL.MortensonW. B.FuhrerM. J.JutaiJ. W.PlanteM.MahJ.DeRuyterF. (2016). Effect of a tailored assistive technology intervention on older adults and their family caregiver: A pragmatic study protocol. BMC Geriatrics, 16(1), 103. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-016-0269-3
FangL. (2019). 农村居民“健康堕距”问题的社会学成因与治理对策[Sociological causes and governance countermeasures of the problem of “healthy abortion distance” among rural residents]. Dongyue Tribune, 40(11), 183–190.
14.
GellN. M.WallaceR. B.LaCroixA. Z.MrozT. M.PatelK. V. (2015). Mobility device use in older adults and incidence of falls and worry about falling: Findings from the 2011-2012 national health and aging trends study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 63(5), 853–859. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.13393
15.
GitlinL. N.WinterL.DennisM. P.CorcoranM.SchinfeldS.HauckW. W. (2006). A randomized trial of a multicomponent home intervention to reduce functional difficulties in older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 54(5), 809–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2006.00703.x
16.
GrilliL.RampichiniC. (2014). Ordered logit model. In MichalosA.C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 4510–4513). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2023
17.
HorowitzA.BrennanM.ReinhardtJ. P.MacmillanT. (Eds.), (2006). The impact of assistive device use on disability and depression among older adults with age-related vision impairments, [Special section] The Journals Of Gerontology. Series B5, 61(1), pp. S274–S280. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/61.5.s274
18.
HuaJ.JiachenL.XiaogaoW.HangkongZ. (2022). 中国康复辅助器具产业政策演进逻辑与实践[Logic and practice of industrial policy evolution of rehabilitation AIDS in China]. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 37(10), 1400–1405.
19.
JohnstonC.McDonaldJ.QuistK. (2020). A generalized ordered probit model. Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, 49(7), 1712–1729. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610926.2019.1565780
20.
KatzS.FordA. B.MoskowitzR.W.JacksonB. A.JaffeM. W. (1963). Studies of illness in the aged: The index of ADL: A standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. Journal of the American Medical Association, 185(12), 914–919. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1963.03060120024016
21.
KimJ. J.LeeJ.ShinJ.HeM. (2022). How are high-tech assistive devices valued in an aging society? Exploring the use and non-use values of equipment that aid limb disability. Technology in Society, 70(2), 102013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102013
22.
LiquanD.ZhihongL.GanlinX.YanyuL. (2022). 增进获得辅助技术, 促进全民健康覆盖[Enhancing access to assistive technology and promoting universal health coverage]. Medical Journal of Peking Union Medical College Hospital, 13(06), 958–964.
23.
LöfqvistC.SlaugB.EkströmH.KylbergM.HaakM. (2016). Use, non-use and perceived unmet needs of assistive technology among Swedish people in the third age. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 11(3), 195–201. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2014.961180
24.
MacLachlanM.SchererM. J. (2018). Systems thinking for assistive technology: A commentary on the GREAT summit. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 13(5), 492–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2018.1472306
25.
Madara MarasingheK. (2016). Assistive technologies in reducing caregiver burden among informal caregivers of older adults: A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 11(5), 353–360. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2015.1087061
Pedrozo Campos AntunesT.Souza Bulle de OliveiraA.HudecR.Brusque CrocettaT.Ferreira de Lima AntãoJ. Y.de Almeida BarbosaR. T.GuarnieriR.MassettiT.GarnerD. M.de AbreuL. C. (2019). Assistive technology for communication of older adults: A systematic review. Aging & Mental Health, 23(4), 417–427. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2018.1426718
29.
Pinilla-RoncancioM.AlkireS. (2021). How poor are people with disabilities? Evidence based on the global multidimensional poverty index. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 31(4), 206–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207320919942
30.
PresslerK. A.FerraroK. F. (2010). Assistive device use as a dynamic acquisition process in later life. The Gerontologist, 50(3), 371–381. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnp170
31.
RosenbaumP.R.RubinD.B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/70.1.41
Syriopoulou DelliC. K.GkiolntaE. (2020). Review of assistive technology in the training of children with autism spectrum disorders. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 68(2), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/20473869.2019.1706333
34.
WidehammarC.LidströmH.HermanssonL. (2017). Environmental barriers to participation and facilitators for use of three types of assistive technology devices. Assistive Technology, 31(2), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2017.1363828
YusifS.SoarJ.Hafeez-BaigA. (2016). Older people, assistive technologies, and the barriers to adoption: A systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 94(1), 112–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.07.004
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
