Introduction: The World Health Organization (WHO) considers assistive devices to be one of the four pillars of healthcare. According to its guidelines for wheelchair provision, failure to follow a process that begins with a personalized assessment and continues with proper wheelchair adaptation can lead to serious and significant consequences, including health issues, impaired function and mobility, and reduced satisfaction with the provided assistive device. This process aligns with the scope of practice of the occupational therapist. Objective: The research question addressed by this study is as follows: what are the outcomes of implementing a structured process for providing personalized manual wheelchairs to adults, in terms of autonomy in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) and satisfaction with the assistive device as reported by both patients and caregivers? Materials and Methods: The evaluation process used in this study was developed by the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation team at Conselve Hospital (PD) and was administered to eight patients over a period of approximately five months. The process consists of four phases: Phase I collects general data, functional independence and information related to environmental accessibility; Phase II involves evaluating posture and selecting the appropriate wheelchair; Phase III consists of a reassessment at the time of testing, and Phase IV, conducted about three months after Phase I, is a follow-up assessment. The follow-up phase evaluates the degree of autonomy in ADLs (as assessed in Phase I) and satisfaction with the assistive device, from both the patient’s and caregiver’s perspectives (see the attached document). Results: Four personalized manual wheelchairs were authorized (three lightweight and one ultralight), two wheelchair recommendations were not approved, and two patients did not receive any wheelchair. T-test results showed no significant changes in autonomy levels, while satisfaction with the assistive device is higher for patients who received the wheelchair assessed in Phase II. Discussion: The lack of significant changes in autonomy may be due to the variability among the participants and the small sample size. Regarding satisfaction, the two aspects with the lowest satisfaction scores were the weight and ease of use of the wheelchairs. Conclusions: The study highlights the importance of the trial phase, preliminary training, post-provision education, and both short- and long-term follow-up. These elements are crucial to ensuring that the assistive device provided is functional, effective, and satisfactory for both the patient and the caregiver, while also contributing to the maintenance or improvement of autonomy in ADLs.
Introduzione: L’Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità (OMS) ritiene gli ausili uno dei quattro pilastri dell’assistenza sanitaria e secondo le sue Linee guida per la fornitura di carrozzine, la mancata applicazione di un processo che inizia con una valutazione personalizzata e segue con un adattamento della carrozzina può portare a gravi e significative conseguenze tra cui danni alla salute, alle funzioni, alla mobilità, nonché a una scarsa soddisfazione per l’ausilio fornito. Ciò rientra nelle competenze del terapista occupazionale. Obiettivo: Il quesito di ricerca a cui il presente progetto di tesi cerca di rispondere è il seguente: a che risultati può portare la strutturazione della procedura di fornitura di carrozzine manuali personalizzate negli adulti, in termini di autonomia nelle ADL e di soddisfazione dell’ausilio fornito per il paziente e i caregivers? Materiali e metodi: L’iter valutativo utilizzato è stato redatto dal personale di Medicina Fisica e Riabilitativa dell’Ospedale di Conselve (PD) ed è stato somministrato a otto pazienti per circa cinque mesi. L’iter è costituito da quattro fasi: la fase I raccoglie dati generali, grado di autonomia e informazioni relative all’accessibilità ambientale, la fase II consiste nella valutazione della postura e nella definizione dell’ausilio, la fase III corrisponde ad una rivalutazione al momento del collaudo mentre la fase IV corrisponde al follow-up, somministrata dopo circa tre mesi dalla prima fase. Quest’ultima è caratterizzata dalla valutazione del grado di autonomia nelle ADL valutato anche in fase I e della soddisfazione dell’ausilio per il paziente e il caregiver (vedi Allegato 1). Risultati: Sono state autorizzate quattro carrozzine manuali personalizzate (tre leggere e una superleggera), due carrozzine valutate non sono state autorizzate e due pazienti non hanno ricevuto nessuna carrozzina. I risultati del T-test dimostrano che non ci sono variazioni significative nei livelli di autonomia, mentre la soddisfazione per l’ausilio risulta maggiore per i pazienti che hanno ricevuto le carrozzine valutate in fase II. Discussione: I risultati relativi all’assenza di una significativa variazione del grado di autonomia possono essere derivati dalla variabilità dei destinatari nelle due somministrazioni e dal numero esiguo di partecipanti. Per quanto concerne la soddisfazione, i due item che hanno ottenuto un punteggio più basso di soddisfazione sono il peso e la facilità d’uso. Conclusioni: Si pone l’accento sull’importanza del momento del collaudo, dell’addestramento preliminare, dell’educazione successiva alla fornitura e dei follow-up necessari a breve e lungo termine. Il fine è assicurare che l’ausilio fornito sia funzionale, efficace e soddisfacente per il paziente e chi lo assiste, oltre a contribuire al mantenimento o all’incremento dell’autonomia nelle ADL.
Dalla valutazione al follow up: utilizzo di un iter di valutazione strutturato per la fornitura di carrozzine manuali personalizzate a pazienti adulti. Studio osservazionale.
PAPARELLA, SARA
2023/2024
Abstract
Introduction: The World Health Organization (WHO) considers assistive devices to be one of the four pillars of healthcare. According to its guidelines for wheelchair provision, failure to follow a process that begins with a personalized assessment and continues with proper wheelchair adaptation can lead to serious and significant consequences, including health issues, impaired function and mobility, and reduced satisfaction with the provided assistive device. This process aligns with the scope of practice of the occupational therapist. Objective: The research question addressed by this study is as follows: what are the outcomes of implementing a structured process for providing personalized manual wheelchairs to adults, in terms of autonomy in Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) and satisfaction with the assistive device as reported by both patients and caregivers? Materials and Methods: The evaluation process used in this study was developed by the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation team at Conselve Hospital (PD) and was administered to eight patients over a period of approximately five months. The process consists of four phases: Phase I collects general data, functional independence and information related to environmental accessibility; Phase II involves evaluating posture and selecting the appropriate wheelchair; Phase III consists of a reassessment at the time of testing, and Phase IV, conducted about three months after Phase I, is a follow-up assessment. The follow-up phase evaluates the degree of autonomy in ADLs (as assessed in Phase I) and satisfaction with the assistive device, from both the patient’s and caregiver’s perspectives (see the attached document). Results: Four personalized manual wheelchairs were authorized (three lightweight and one ultralight), two wheelchair recommendations were not approved, and two patients did not receive any wheelchair. T-test results showed no significant changes in autonomy levels, while satisfaction with the assistive device is higher for patients who received the wheelchair assessed in Phase II. Discussion: The lack of significant changes in autonomy may be due to the variability among the participants and the small sample size. Regarding satisfaction, the two aspects with the lowest satisfaction scores were the weight and ease of use of the wheelchairs. Conclusions: The study highlights the importance of the trial phase, preliminary training, post-provision education, and both short- and long-term follow-up. These elements are crucial to ensuring that the assistive device provided is functional, effective, and satisfactory for both the patient and the caregiver, while also contributing to the maintenance or improvement of autonomy in ADLs.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Paparella_Sara.pdf
Accesso riservato
Dimensione
1.51 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.51 MB | Adobe PDF |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/77131