Patricia Rigby1, Stephen E Ryan, Kent A Campbell. 1. Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. patty.rigby@utoronto.ca
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the satisfaction with quality of life (QOL) of adults with tetraplegia from spinal cord injury (SCI) who use and do not use electronic aids to daily living (EADLs). METHOD: This study used a cross-sectional design. Thirty-six persons with spinal cord injuries or conditions at or above C5/6 level participated. Fifteen participants used EADL at home and 21 formed the comparison group of non-users of EADL; all were living in the community. We used the Quality of Life Profile-Physical Disabilities (QOLP-PD) to examine participant's QOL. RESULTS: Both groups rated the levels of importance of all aspects of QOL equally. The EADL users rated their satisfaction with QOL significantly higher for total QOLP-PD scores and for four of the nine domains, including all three domains of belonging. The groups did not differ in age, FIM scores, level of education, and hours of paid attendant care. The EADL user group had significantly more males than females, and had higher levels of SCI. CONCLUSIONS: EADLs appear to contribute to the experience of greater subjective QOL for persons with severe physical disability from high SCI. Prospective cohort studies designs that employ methods and analytic plans to study the causal effect of EADLs on QOL are recommended. The QOLP-PD was found to be a valid measure of QOL for this population.
PURPOSE: To compare the satisfaction with quality of life (QOL) of adults with tetraplegia from spinal cord injury (SCI) who use and do not use electronic aids to daily living (EADLs). METHOD: This study used a cross-sectional design. Thirty-six persons with spinal cord injuries or conditions at or above C5/6 level participated. Fifteen participants used EADL at home and 21 formed the comparison group of non-users of EADL; all were living in the community. We used the Quality of Life Profile-Physical Disabilities (QOLP-PD) to examine participant's QOL. RESULTS: Both groups rated the levels of importance of all aspects of QOL equally. The EADL users rated their satisfaction with QOL significantly higher for total QOLP-PD scores and for four of the nine domains, including all three domains of belonging. The groups did not differ in age, FIM scores, level of education, and hours of paid attendant care. The EADL user group had significantly more males than females, and had higher levels of SCI. CONCLUSIONS: EADLs appear to contribute to the experience of greater subjective QOL for persons with severe physical disability from high SCI. Prospective cohort studies designs that employ methods and analytic plans to study the causal effect of EADLs on QOL are recommended. The QOLP-PD was found to be a valid measure of QOL for this population.