Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26232684›Full record

Trial reportArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitation2015

Effectiveness of a Wheelchair Skills Training Program for Powered Wheelchair Users: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

R Lee Kirby, William C Miller, Francois Routhier, Louise Demers, Alex Mihailidis, Jan Miller Polgar, Paula W Rushton, Laura Titus, Cher Smith, Mike McAllister and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. User Field Testing for Robot Wheelchairs: A Mixed-Method Approach.IEEE ... International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics : [proceedings] · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

R Lee KirbyDepartment of Medicine, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. Electronic address: kirby@dal.ca.
William C MillerDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Francois RouthierDepartment of Rehabilitation, Laval University, Québec City, Quebec, Canada; Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration, Quebec City Rehabilitation Institute, Québec City, Quebec, Canada.
Louise DemersSchool of Rehabilitation, University of Montreal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada; Research Center, University of Montreal Institute of Geriatrics, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Alex MihailidisDepartment of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jan Miller PolgarSchool of Occupational Therapy, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Paula W RushtonSchool of Rehabilitation, University of Montreal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada; University Hospital Centre Sainte-Justine Research Center, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Laura TitusSchool of Occupational Therapy, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Cher SmithDepartment of Occupational Therapy, Capital District Health Authority, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Mike McAllisterFaculty of Computer Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Chris TheriaultResearch Methods Unit, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Kara ThompsonResearch Methods Unit, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Bonita SawatzkyDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Funding

CIHR 100925-1CIHR AMG-100925
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo test the hypothesis that powered wheelchair users who receive the Wheelchair Skills Training Program (WSTP) improve their wheelchair skills in comparison with a control group that receives standard care, and secondarily to assess goal achievement, satisfaction with training, retention, injury rate, confidence with wheelchair use, and participation.

designRandomized controlled trial.

settingRehabilitation centers and communities.

participantsPowered wheelchair users (N=116).

interventionFive 30-minute WSTP training sessions.

main outcome measuresAssessments were done at baseline (t1), posttraining (t2), and 3 months posttraining (t3) using the Wheelchair Skills Test Questionnaire (WST-Q version 4.1), Goal Attainment Score (GAS), Satisfaction Questionnaire, injury rate, Wheelchair Use Confidence Scale for Power Wheelchair Users (WheelCon), and Life Space Assessment (LSA).

resultsThere was no significant t2-t1 difference between the groups for WST-Q capacity scores (P=.600), but the difference for WST-Q performance scores was significant (P=.016) with a relative (t2/t1 × 100%) improvement of the median score for the intervention group of 10.8%. The mean GAS ± SD for the intervention group after training was 92.8%±11.4%, and satisfaction with training was high. The WST-Q gain was not retained at t3. There was no clinically significant difference between the groups in injury rate and no statistically significant differences in WheelCon or LSA scores at t3.

conclusionsPowered wheelchair users who receive formal wheelchair skills training demonstrate modest, transient posttraining improvements in their WST-Q performance scores, have substantial improvements on individualized goals, and are positive about training.

Indexed as

Rehabilitation CentersWheelchairsAdultAgedElectric Power SuppliesFemaleGoalsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicPatient SatisfactionPersons with DisabilitiesSingle-Blind MethodMotor skillsRandomized controlled trialRehabilitationWheelchairs

Identifiers

PMID26232684
PMCPMC4674291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.