RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this review is to explore the evidence and efficacy of two trends in early childhood intervention services: the family-centered model and the use of tele-intervention. METHODS: A systematic review was carried out following the PRISMA methodology and using three databases: Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus. The studies included were those aimed at children from 0 to 6 years of age, focused on early intervention, and which alluded to the family-centered model and/or tele-intervention. RESULTS: a total of 33 studies were included. Five main themes were identified: (1) The participation of children and family is facilitated and improved by the family-centered model of care; (2) the feeling of competence, self-efficacy, satisfaction and empowerment in professionals and families have a positive impact on quality of life; (3) the use of tele-intervention as a tool for prevention and intervention; (4) preparation for telepractice can improve the development of commitment; (5) tele-intervention as a possible solution to contextual barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Tele-intervention in pediatrics is presented as a tool inherent to the family-centered model since its implementation involves several common strategies. Future lines of research should explore the use of this tool as a possible solution to contextual barriers.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: A wide range of products are available to assist mobility, and it is, therefore, of great importance to obtain empirical information regarding the expected impact of the use of these products based on outcome measures. People affected by neurological disorders often use products to assist mobility such as wheelchairs (both manual self-propelled wheelchairs and externally propelled chairs such as electric wheelchairs), walkers, walking sticks, etc. It is important to conduct an assessment of the psychosocial impact of these products on the lives of affected people. METHODS: We performed this assessment using the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS) and a socio-demographic questionnaire. RESULTS: The results showed greater psychosocial benefits relating to the use of electric wheelchairs in comparison with walking sticks or manual, non-self-propelled chairs. Moreover, significant differences are present in the three subscales of the PIADS in relation to variables such as age, training in the use of assistive technology (AT) and funding. CONCLUSION: Therefore, we conclude that the use of AT should be promoted among this group as a way to improve their adaptability, competency and self-esteem, and to reduce limits on participation deriving from the physical and contextual barriers faced by this collective.Implications for rehabilitationAmong the assessment of different mobility AT displaying a higher score in the three subscales of the PIADS amongst people using electric wheelchairs than among those using non-self-propelled manual wheelchairs. On the other hand, we found that the walker has a significant score only in the competence subscale. Canes, for example the stick 4-p is significant in the three subscales, or the walking cane in terms of competence. Despite the fact that crutches and walking sticks obtained the lowest score in this study.Not only the assessment is necessary, but also the adjustment of AT to the person who is going to use it, as well as some training on how to use it. Only 23.8% of the participants received training in the use of their main assistive device in this study.The results seem to indicate that for elder users, the score on adaptability with the AT is lower. That may result in future lines of research in usability and improving in terms of the needs of end-users and these AT since a high percentage of people with neurological conditions are elder people.The application of specific scales such as PIADS that helps to measure the use and capacity of the AT prescribed to patients with neurological disease provides more informed clinical reasoning.
