ÄÛBÑо¿Ôº

Multiple Sclerosis: (Demers et al, 2002; QUEST 2.0; n = 83; mean age = 47.8 (9.4) years, types of devices used: Manual wheelchair = 47%, Powered wheelchair = 20%, Scooter = 14%, Regular walker = 12%, Wheeled walker = 7%, English and French speaking sample)

SCI patients who use manual wheelchair: (Bergstrom & Samuelsson, 2006; n = 124; mean age = 49.7 (15.6) years; SCI characteristics not reported)

• Average (Standard Deviation) score = 3.99 (1.0)

• Ease of adjustment (mean = 3.80, SD = 1.1) and comfort (mean = 3.77, SD = 1.0) were rated as least satisfying

• Ease of use was rated most satisfying (mean = 4.42, SD = 0.7)

Chronic SCI: (Chan & Chan, 2007; n = 31; mean age = 41.68 (11.17) years; mean time since injury = 3.79 (3.72) years; ASIA Classification, A = 70.99%, B = 9.68%, C = 3.23%, D = 16.13%, Chinese Sample)

Assistive Technology Users (Demers et al, 2000; n=150)

Assistive Device Users (Wessels et al, 2003; n=2002; mean age=58.0(15.7); gender=female 60.7%-Dutch Version (D-QUEST))¡¤ Factor analysis results suggested a bidimensional structure of satisfaction with assistive technology related to the assistive technology device (eight items) and services (four items)

*Excellent validity for all items; *Correlation is significant at the 0.000 level (2-tailed)

Wheelchair users across residential settings: (Karmarkar et al, 2009; n = 132; mean ages ranged from 63.23 (5.6) to 83.8 (5.4) years)

Community Dwelling Assistive Devise Users: (Mao et al, 2010; (alpha = 105; ICC = 36); mean age = 38.9 to 33.5 years; mean time using device ranged from 2.6 to 3.3 years, The T-QUEST (Taiwanese version) has one additional item, Cost)

Assistive Technology Users-Diagnosis unknown (Demers et al, 2000; n=85; 7-11 days in between testing)

• Items with the highest item-total correlations were follow-up services (Weighted Kappa=0.64), simplicity of use (0.63 ), effectiveness (0.63),and adjustments (0.67 )
• The lowest item-total correlation was for cost (0.17 )

Mobility Devise Users: (Demers et al, 1999; n = 97)

Assistive Device Users (Demers et al, 2000; n=150; Diagnosis unknown))

• Items with the highest item-total correlations were follow-up services (r=0.64), simplicity of use (r= 0.63 ), effectiveness (r= 0.63),and adjustments (r=0.67 )
• The lowest item-total correlation was for cost (r=0.17 )

Assistive Device Users (Wessels et al, 2003; n=2002; mean age=58.0(15.7); gender=female 60.7%-Dutch Version (D-QUEST))

Initial items were assessed by a team of 11 individuals who represented both consumers and stakeholders of assistive technologies (Demers, et al. 1996)

Assessed by 12 content experts from 11 facilities in the United States, Canada and the Netherlands and 150 device users (no information on diagnosis) (Demers et al, 2000)

• Only two items were very weakly rated by a substantial proportion of content experts, namely installation (#19; 38%) and reaction of others (#23; 31%); the largest proportion of items (n = 18, 75%) was considered of primary importance by more than half the respondents
• From the users' point of view, analyses revealed that 19 of the 24 items generated a mean importance score above 4.00 (based on a 5 point rating scale, 1-no importance; 5-very important); based on this cutoff, the items weakly rated were training, appearance, cost, reaction of others, and social circle support

The measure was developed with the assistance of subject matter experts including users of assistive technologies.