ArticlePloS one2021
Exploratory investigation of the outcomes of wheelchair provision through two service models in Indonesia.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and characteristics of community-dwelling older adults using mobility devices: a cross-national comparison between the United States and China.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Ultralight wheelchair part failures are associated with sensor-monitored road shocks: A pilot study.Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA · 2025Article
- Incidence and dynamics of mobility device use among community-dwelling older adults in the United States.Journal of elder policy · 2024Article
- A Systematic Review of Outcomes Measured Following New Wheelchair and Seating-Prescription Interventions in Adults.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that only 17-37% of the approximately 77 million people who need a wheelchair have access to one. Many organizations are trying to address this need through varying service delivery approaches. For instance, some adhere to WHO's recommended 8-steps service approach while others provide wheelchairs with little to no service. There is limited and sometimes conflicting evidence of the impact of the WHO's recommendations on the outcomes of wheelchair provision. To help build this evidence, we \explored outcomes of two groups of users who received their wheelchairs through two service models over time. The 8-Steps group (n = 118) received a wheelchair selected from a range of models from service providers trained using the WHO process, and the standard of care (SOC) group (n = 24) received hospital-style wheelchairs and without clinical service. Interviews were conducted at baseline and at follow-up 3 to 6 months after provision, to collect data about wheelchair usage, satisfaction, skills, maintenance and repairs, and life satisfaction. Across-group statistical comparisons were not appropriate due to significant differences between groups. In general, participants used their wheelchairs every day but reported very low mobility levels (<500 meters for the 8-steps group, and <100 meters for the SOC group.) The 8-steps group used their wheelchair for either between 1-3 hours per day, or more than 8 hours per day. The SOC used it between 1 and 3 hours per day. Overall, wheelchair usage and wheelchair skills decreased over the 3- to 6-month data collection timeline. Wheelchair breakdowns were common in both groups emphasizing the need for maintenance, occurring more frequently in the 8-Steps (28.8%) compared to the SOC group (8%), and emphasizing the need for maintenance services. No significant differences were found when comparing device satisfaction across wheelchairs types. Our results emphasize the need for routine maintenance to address frequent wheelchair breakdowns. Our results also demonstrate a large disparity in several outcome variables across groups which motivates future studies where across-group comparisons are possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.