Advertisement

Expectations and Concerns Emerging from Experiences with Assistive Technology for ALS Patients

  • Cornelia EicherEmail author
  • Jörn Kiselev
  • Kirsten Brukamp
  • Diana Kiemel
  • Susanne Spittel
  • André Maier
  • Ursula Oleimeulen
  • Marius Greuèl
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11572)

Abstract

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurologic disease effecting a gradual loss of physical body functionalities with usually unaltered cognitive functionality. Due to the lack of autonomy, affected persons become dependent on the support of third parties, such as relatives, friends and informal and formal caregivers. Autonomy and self-determination play a crucial role in the lives of ALS patients and can partly be maintained by the implementation of assistive technologies and devices (ATD). In addition to life-supporting measures, ATD can support ALS patients in their mobility, communication and help them control their domestic environment, and thus foster social participation and autonomy. However, little is known about expectations and concerns of patients and their informal and formal caregivers regarding ATD. We therefore conducted semi-structured interviews as part of a mixed-methods requirements analysis to evaluate how ATD influences the lives and living spaces of patients with ALS as well as their family members and caregivers, and additionally their expectations and concerns raised by ATD. The presented study research was conducted as part of the research and development project “ROBINA - robot-assisted services for patients with ALS”.

Keywords

Assistive technology and devices ATD Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis Expectations and strengths Concerns and weaknesses 

References

  1. 1.
    Couratier, P., et al.: Epidemiology of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a review of literature. Rev. Neurol. (Paris) 172, 37–45 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurol.2015.11.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    del Aguila, M.A., Longstreth, W.T., McGuire, V., Koepsell, T.D., van Belle, G.: Prognosis in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a population-based study. Neurology 60, 813–819 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chiò, A., Logroscino, G., Traynor, B., Collins, J., Simeone, J., Goldstein, L., White, L.: Global epidemiology of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review of the published literature. Neuroepidemiology 41, 118–130 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1159/000351153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tramonti, F., Bongioanni, P., Di Bernardo, C., Davitti, S., Rossi, B.: Quality of life of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Psychol. Health Med. 17, 621–628 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2011.651149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martínez-Campo, Y., et al.: Observational study of patients in Spain with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: correlations between clinical status, quality of life, and dignity. BMC Palliat. Care 16, 75 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-017-0260-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Siqueira, S.C., de Vitorino, P.V.O., Prudente, C.O.M., de Santana, T.S., de Melo, G.F.: Quality of life of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Revista da Rede de Enfermagem do Nordeste 18, 139 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.15253/2175-6783.2017000100019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oster, C., Pagnini, F.: Resentment, hate, and hope in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Front. Psychol. 3, 530 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pagnini, F.: Psychological wellbeing and quality of life in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a review. Int. J. Psychol. 48, 194–205 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.691977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    WHO | Assistive devices and technologies. http://www.who.int/disabilities/technology/en/
  10. 10.
    Bausch, M.E., Mittler, J.E., Hasselbring, T.S., Cross, D.P.: The assistive technology act of 2004: what does it say and what does it mean? Phys. Disabil. Educ. Relat. Serv. 23, 59–67 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mackenzie, L., Bhuta, P., Rusten, K., Devine, J., Love, A., Waterson, P.: Communications technology and motor neuron disease: an Australian survey of people with motor neuron disease. JMIR Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 3, e2 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.2196/rehab.4017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ball, L.J., et al.: Eye-gaze access to AAC technology for people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. J. Med. Speech Lang. Pathol. 18, 11–23 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Association for the Advancement of Assistive Technology in Europe. In: Assistive Technology from Adapted Equipment to Inclusive Environments: AAATE 2009. IOS Press (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    GKV und PKV - Mitglieder- und Versichertenzahl im Vergleich bis 2018 | Statistik. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/155823/umfrage/gkv-pkv-mitglieder-und-versichertenzahl-im-vergleich/
  15. 15.
    Land, B.: Das deutsche Gesundheitssystem - Struktur und Finanzierung: Wissen für Pflege- und Therapieberufe. Verlag W. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart (2018)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wichert, B., Haufe-Lexware GmbH & Co. KG: Krankenversicherung 2018 Zahlen, Daten, Fakten. (2018)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Funke, A., et al.: Hilfsmittelversorgung bei der amyotrophen Lateralsklerose: Analyse aus 3 Jahren Fallmanagement in einem internetunterstützten Versorgungsnetzwerk. Der Nervenarzt 86, 1007–1017 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-015-4398-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mayring, P.: Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken. Beltz (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Caligari, M., Godi, M., Guglielmetti, S., Franchignoni, F., Nardone, A.: Eye tracking communication devices in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: impact on disability and quality of life. Amyotroph. Lateral Scler. Frontotemporal Degener. 14, 546–552 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.3109/21678421.2013.803576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Linse, K., Aust, E., Joos, M., Hermann, A.: Communication matters—pitfalls and promise of hightech communication devices in palliative care of severely physically disabled patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Front. Neurol. 9, 603 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Beukelman, D., Fager, S., Nordness, A.: Communication support for people with ALS. Neurol. Res. Int. 2011, 1–6 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/714693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Körner, S., et al.: Speech therapy and communication device: impact on quality of life and mood in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Amyotroph. Lateral Scler. Frontotemporal Degener. 14, 20–25 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.3109/17482968.2012.692382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hughes, R.G. (ed.): Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook for Nurses. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Henschke, C.: Provision and financing of assistive technology devices in Germany: a bureaucratic odyssey? The case of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Health Policy 105, 176–184 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.01.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hagglund, K.J. (Ed.): Handbook of applied disability and rehabilitation research. Springer, New York (2006) Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zipkin, P.H.: The limits of mass customization. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 42, 81–87 (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Toch, E., Wang, Y., Cranor, L.F.: Personalization and privacy: a survey of privacy risks and remedies in personalization-based systems. User Model. User Adapt. Interact. 22, 203–220 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-011-9110-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Resources, M.A.: Information: Special and Gifted Education: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. IGI Global, Hershey (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cornelia Eicher
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jörn Kiselev
    • 1
  • Kirsten Brukamp
    • 2
  • Diana Kiemel
    • 2
  • Susanne Spittel
    • 1
  • André Maier
    • 1
  • Ursula Oleimeulen
    • 3
  • Marius Greuèl
    • 3
  1. 1.Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthCharité – Universitätsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Evangelische Hochschule LudwigsburgLudwigsburgGermany
  3. 3.Pflegewerk Berlin GmbHBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations