Regional survey of assistive devices use by children with physical disabilities in southern Taiwan.
Аннотация
BACKGROUND
Despite increasing use of assistive devices (ADs) by physically disabled (PD) children, the use rate, number, effects and related services have seldom been studied. Understanding AD utilization is helpful in improving the related services. This study describes the usage of ADs by children with physical disabilities (PDs).
METHODS
This regional survey enrolled children with PDs. The children's parents or primary caregivers filled out structured questionnaires regarding the children's use of and need for ADs, the benefits and problems associated with the ADs and related services.
RESULTS
In total, 224 ADs were used by 124 children (1.79 ADs per child). The most commonly used ADs were orthoses (n = 77, 62.10%), mobility aids (n = 51, 41.13%), and aids for therapy and training (n = 21, 16.94%). The degree of disability, age, gender, diagnosis and rehabilitation training location were not associated with the number of ADs used. Most children (n = 103, 83.06%) benefited from ADs, and 93 (75%) children had been evaluated prior to buying ADs. Eighty three (66.94%) parents paid for the Ads, and 108 (87.10%) parents acquired information from rehabilitation professionals. Forty one (40.20%) parents were satisfied with the services of local suppliers; 119 (95.97%) parents had applied to their local government for financial support; 82 (68.91%) parents were not satisfied with the application procedures or the amount of support they received.
CONCLUSION
Although parents of PD children favored the usage of ADs, they needed additional information. We suggest that policies and strategies are needed to reduce barriers to ADs utilization, enhance insurance coverage and improve ease of using the services.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.