Use of Assistive Technology for Persons with Psychosocial Disability: Systematic Review

Ikenna D Ebuenyi; Celina Flocks-Monaghan; Sarju S Rai; Ralph de Vries; Soumitra S Bhuyan; Jonathan Pearlman; Nev Jones

doi:10.2196/49750

Use of Assistive Technology for Persons with Psychosocial Disability: Systematic Review

JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2023 Nov 15:10:e49750. doi: 10.2196/49750.

Authors

Ikenna D Ebuenyi^#¹, Celina Flocks-Monaghan², Sarju S Rai³, Ralph de Vries⁴, Soumitra S Bhuyan⁵, Jonathan Pearlman¹, Nev Jones⁶

Affiliations

¹ Department of Rehabilitation Science and Technology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
² School of Population Health, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
³ Athena Institute, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
⁴ Medical Library, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
⁵ Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States.
⁶ School of Social Work, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.

^# Contributed equally.

PMID: 37966875
PMCID: PMC10687692
DOI: 10.2196/49750

Abstract

Background: Assistive technology (AT) refers to assistive products (AP) and associated systems and services that are relevant for function, independence, well-being, and quality of life for individuals with disabilities. There is a high unmet need for AT for persons with disabilities and this is worse for persons with cognitive and mental or psychosocial disabilities (PDs). Further, information and knowledge on AT for PDs is limited.

Objective: The aim of this review was to explore the pattern of AT use among persons with PDs and its associated socioeconomic and health benefits.

Methods: The review was reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), and we conducted systematic searches in the 4 databases: PubMed, Embase.com, APA PsycInfo (Ebsco), and Web of Science (Core Collection) with the following index terms: "Assistive Technology," "Self-Help Devices," "Quality of Life," "Activities of Daily Living," "Mental Disorders." We included only AT individuals with PDs can independently use without reliance on a provider. Identified papers were exported to EndNote (Clarivate) and we undertook a narrative synthesis of the included studies.

Results: In total, 5 studies were included in the review which reported use of different AT for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety disorders. The APs described in the included studies are Palm tungsten T3 handheld computer, MOBUS, personal digital assistant, automated pill cap, weighted chain blankets, and smartphone function. All the AT products identified in the studies were found to be easily usable by individuals with PDs. The APs reported in the included studies have broad impact and influence on social function, productivity, and treatment or management. The studies were heterogeneous and were all conducted in high-income countries.

Conclusions: Our study contributes to and strengthens existing evidence on the relevance of AT for PDs and its potential to support socioeconomic participation and health. Although AT has the potential to improve function and participation for individuals with PDs; this review highlights that research on the subject is limited. Further research and health policy changes are needed to improve research and AT service provision for individuals with PDs especially in low-income settings.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42022343735; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=343735.

Keywords: assistive products; assistive technology; health policy; inclusion; participation; psychosocial; psychosocial disability; rehabilitation; socioeconomic; well-being.

©Ikenna D Ebuenyi, Celina Flocks-Monaghan, Sarju S Rai, Ralph de Vries, Soumitra S Bhuyan, Jonathan Pearlman, Nev Jones. Originally published in JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technology (https://rehab.jmir.org), 15.11.2023.

Publication types

Review