Search

There is an increasing interest in design and creative thinking processes in the Sciences, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and health education disciplines. Many new degree programs are integrating design thinking into their syllabi, with the intention of bringing creative problem-solving methods to these disciplines. In reality, the exposure these students get is minimal, and it does not provide enough foundation for them to use the knowledge and apply the process(es) in real-life situations. There is an increased awareness of the importance of design thinking in the innovative process. More and more STEM, business, and health establishments are embedding trained designers into their research teams -- yet many designers are not equipped to work on interdisciplinary teams. Design students tend to approach problems more intuitively, opportunistically, and build on creative leaps of imagination whereas, STEM and health disciplines are often more algorithmic, systematic, and rationale. This can often generate tension in interdisciplinary teams, especially when traditional disciplines (e.g., Engineering, Sciences) are integrating relatively newer thinking (e.g., design thinking). In this paper, we share the outcome of a phenomenological study on a high-functioning interdisciplinary team working on a health innovation project focused on aging with a disability. This case study illustrates the skill set needed for designers, health and technology professionals to make a significant contribution to its overall outcome. We identified key attributes that contribute towards being an effective member of interdisciplinary teams. Based on this study, we propose a pedagogical approach to better equip design, STEM, and Health students to be more competitive in changing economic expectations and ensure more impactful design outcomes.

Federal legislation such as IDEA (1997) and NCLB (2001) have led to an increase in the number of students with significant disabilities receiving instruction in the general education classroom. This inclusionary movement has established a more diverse student population in which general and special education teachers are responsible for providing instruction that meets the needs of all their students. Although most research focuses on effective inclusionary practices for students with high incidence disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities), literature has revealed a dramatic increase in the number of students with severe/multiple disabilities receiving support in general education settings. Therefore, it is imperative that educators acquire the effective inclusive practices necessary to meet the unique needs of students with severe/multiple disabilities. A review of literature was conducted to determine effective ways to include and support students with severe/multiple disabilities within the general education classroom.

The emergence of digital technologies has shown a promising potential to enhance access to goods, services, and resources. Digital technologies and interfaces differ from mechanical and analog electronic technologies as they often require internet access and are dependent on a set of activities or actions for the user to successfully implement them in their day-to-day life. We describe this set of activities as digital activities of daily living (DADLs). Much like activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, and enhanced activities of living, DADLs are critical to supporting well-being and healthy aging. For example, the digitalization of tasks such as health insurance (e.g. creating a Medicare account) or banking (e.g. making a utility payment via a web portal) are all DADLs. With a growing dependence on digital technologies to participate in day-to-day life, disparities in individuals' ability to competently complete DADLs present major concerns for independence, quality of life, safety, and well-being. We developed a framework for understanding DADLs and their implication for daily life. Furthermore, we provide a guide for the development of interventions and outline implications for research, practice, and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a "total approach to rehabilitation", combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970's, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program.

Prior studies on older adults’ risk taking have paid littleattention to the healthcare domain or social influences ondecision making. This study examined age-related differencesin medication risk taking and the effects of a collaborativedecision-making experience on individuals’ tendency to takerisks. We recruited 24 younger (mean age = 19.50, SD = 1.41)and 24 older adults (mean age = 70.54, SD = 2.30), and askedthem to choose between hypothetical medications thatdiffered in probabilities and outcomes of treatment success.To investigate the effects of risk-neutral versus risk-advantageous trials, participants chose between a risky optionand a sure option that had equal expected values (risk-neutral)or between a risky option and a sure option that had a lowerexpected value (risk-advantageous). Participants completedthe decision task first individually (the pre-collaborationphase), then in dyads (the collaboration phase), and onceagain individually (the post-collaboration phase). During thepre-collaboration phase older adults showed a smallerincrease in risk-taking tendency in response to risk-advantageous trials compared to younger adults. The pre-andpost-collaboration data showed that older adults’ riskpreferences converged towards their partner’s preference to agreater extent following collaboration relative to youngeradults. These findings highlight the importance of designingdecision aids to encourage older adults to take risks when risktaking is beneficial, and considering how social processesinfluence patients’ medication decisions.

Background and Objectives There are growing numbers of older adults with long-term vision impairment who are likely to experience everyday activity challenges from their impairment in conjunction with age-related changes. Technology has potential to support activity engagement. To develop effective technologies and interventions, we need to understand the context of activity challenges and identify unmet support needs. Research Design and Methods The Aging Concerns, Challenges, and Everyday Solution Strategies (ACCESS) study is a mixed-method approach to explore everyday challenges of people aging with long-term disabilities. Participants included 60 adults aging with long-term vision impairment (63% female; M age = 67, SD  = 4.6) who completed in-depth, structured interviews exploring the nature of everyday challenges and their unmet support needs for activity engagement. We conducted a content analysis using a deductive and inductive approach to build a detailed coding scheme of challenge codes and subcodes. Results The analyses provided detailed insights about the nature of challenges people aging with vision impairment experience when performing specific instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) in the context of home maintenance, transportation, shopping/finance, and managing health. Vision-related challenges and participation restrictions were identified for several activities that require reading, navigation, and identification (e.g. shopping, medication management, public transportation). Emergent challenge themes for performing IADLs included personal limitations (e.g. physical, cognitive, financial) and environmental barriers (e.g. accessibility, technology, transportation). Discussion and Implications Contextual examples of IADL challenges among individuals aging with vision impairment highlight opportunities for technology design and innovation to support participation in everyday activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assistive robots have the potential to support independence, enhance safety, and lower healthcare costs for older adults, as well as alleviate the demands of their care partners. However, ensuring that these robots will effectively and reliably address end-user needs in the long term requires user-specific design factors to be considered during the robot development process. To identify these design factors, we embedded Stretch, a mobile manipulator created by Hello Robot Inc., in the home of an older adult with motor impairments and his care partner for four weeks to support them with everyday activities. An occupational therapist and a robotics engineer lived with them during this period, employing an immersive participatory design approach to co-design and customise the robot with them. We highlight the benefits of this immersive participatory design experience and provide insights into robot design that can be applied broadly to other assistive technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]