Evaluating equipment for people with disabilities: user and technical perspectives on basic commodes
Evaluating equipment for people with disabilities: user and technical perspectives on basic commodes
Disabled people often do not use the equipment supplied to them. Past work indicates that there are many reasons for this, including the low priority given to user views by the designers and manufacturers of such equipment. A number of different methodologies have been used to evaluate equipment. This paper describes an evaluation of basic commodes, a project funded by the Medical Devices Agency, Department of Health, in which both a user survey and technical tests were employed.
A sample of 18 basic commodes, divided into four categories, was evaluated by 40 users, a questionnaire being administered to determine user views. A series of 13 technical tests was also carried out.
The results showed that the preferred commodes as indicated by the users did not necessarily perform well in the technical tests, with at least one of the products having potentially serious design faults. It is suggested that users, therapists and engineers each have an essential contribution to make in the evaluation of equipment for disabled people.
157-166
Ballinger, C.
1495742c-90aa-4074-920e-95e6cc3d5380
Pickering, R.M.
4a828314-7ddf-4f96-abed-3407017d4c90
Bannister, S.
f64b2128-048a-4f79-97a2-d57b2b86c5d4
Gore, S.
aca42b1d-dc18-4415-acdf-fd8b1d4f67a6
McLellan, D.
4981897c-3385-4ee5-8f69-62a39f0cdeff
May 1995
Ballinger, C.
1495742c-90aa-4074-920e-95e6cc3d5380
Pickering, R.M.
4a828314-7ddf-4f96-abed-3407017d4c90
Bannister, S.
f64b2128-048a-4f79-97a2-d57b2b86c5d4
Gore, S.
aca42b1d-dc18-4415-acdf-fd8b1d4f67a6
McLellan, D.
4981897c-3385-4ee5-8f69-62a39f0cdeff
Ballinger, C., Pickering, R.M., Bannister, S., Gore, S. and McLellan, D.
(1995)
Evaluating equipment for people with disabilities: user and technical perspectives on basic commodes.
Clinical Rehabilitation, 9 (2), .
(doi:10.1177/026921559500900211).
Abstract
Disabled people often do not use the equipment supplied to them. Past work indicates that there are many reasons for this, including the low priority given to user views by the designers and manufacturers of such equipment. A number of different methodologies have been used to evaluate equipment. This paper describes an evaluation of basic commodes, a project funded by the Medical Devices Agency, Department of Health, in which both a user survey and technical tests were employed.
A sample of 18 basic commodes, divided into four categories, was evaluated by 40 users, a questionnaire being administered to determine user views. A series of 13 technical tests was also carried out.
The results showed that the preferred commodes as indicated by the users did not necessarily perform well in the technical tests, with at least one of the products having potentially serious design faults. It is suggested that users, therapists and engineers each have an essential contribution to make in the evaluation of equipment for disabled people.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: May 1995
Organisations:
Primary Care & Population Sciences
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 352276
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/352276
ISSN: 0269-2155
PURE UUID: 24899fe8-0fd7-4a31-afc9-50b48ed2c186
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 08 May 2013 12:19
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 13:49
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
C. Ballinger
Author:
S. Bannister
Author:
S. Gore
Author:
D. McLellan
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics