Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Medline Book to support NIHPA logoLink to Medline Book to support NIHPA
. 2020 Oct;24(50):1–194. doi: 10.3310/hta24500

Powered mobility interventions for very young children with mobility limitations to aid participation and positive development: the EMPoWER evidence synthesis.

Nathan Bray, Niina Kolehmainen, Jennifer McAnuff, Louise Tanner, Lorna Tuersley, Fiona Beyer, Aimee Grayston, Dor Wilson, Rhiannon Tudor Edwards, Jane Noyes, Dawn Craig
PMCID: PMC7681349  PMID: 33078704

Abstract

BACKGROUND

One-fifth of all disabled children have mobility limitations. Early provision of powered mobility for very young children (aged < 5 years) is hypothesised to trigger positive developmental changes. However, the optimum age at which to introduce powered mobility is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this project was to synthesise existing evidence regarding the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of powered mobility for very young children, compared with the more common practice of powered mobility provision from the age of 5 years.

REVIEW METHODS

The study was planned as a mixed-methods evidence synthesis and economic modelling study. First, evidence relating to the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, acceptability, feasibility and anticipated outcomes of paediatric powered mobility interventions was reviewed. A convergent mixed-methods evidence synthesis was undertaken using framework synthesis, and a separate qualitative evidence synthesis was undertaken using thematic synthesis. The two syntheses were subsequently compared and contrasted to develop a logic model for evaluating the outcomes of powered mobility interventions for children. Because there were insufficient published data, it was not possible to develop a robust economic model. Instead, a budget impact analysis was conducted to estimate the cost of increased powered mobility provision for very young children, using cost data from publicly available sources.

DATA SOURCES

A range of bibliographic databases [Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINHAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE™ (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Occupational Therapy Systematic Evaluation of Evidence (OTseeker), Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), PsycINFO, Science Citation Index (SCI; Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA, USA), Social Sciences Citation Index™ (SSCI; Clarivate Analytics), Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (CPCI-S; Clarivate Analytics), Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Science & Humanities (CPCI-SSH; Clarivate Analytics), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database and OpenGrey] was systematically searched and the included studies were quality appraised. Searches were carried out in June 2018 and updated in October 2019. The date ranges searched covered from 1946 to September 2019.

RESULTS

In total, 89 studies were included in the review. Only two randomised controlled trials were identified. The overall quality of the evidence was low. No conclusive evidence was found about the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of powered mobility in children aged either < 5 or ≥ 5 years. However, strong support was found that powered mobility interventions have a positive impact on children's movement and mobility, and moderate support was found for the impact on children's participation, play and social interactions and on the safety outcome of accidents and pain. 'Fit' between the child, the equipment and the environment was found to be important, as were the outcomes related to a child's independence, freedom and self-expression. The evidence supported two distinct conceptualisations of the primary powered mobility outcome, movement and mobility: the former is 'movement for movement's sake' and the latter destination-focused mobility. Powered mobility should be focused on 'movement for movement's sake' in the first instance. From the budget impact analysis, it was estimated that, annually, the NHS spends £1.89M on the provision of powered mobility for very young children, which is < 2% of total wheelchair service expenditure.

LIMITATIONS

The original research question could not be answered because there was a lack of appropriately powered published research.

CONCLUSIONS

Early powered mobility is likely to have multiple benefits for very young children, despite the lack of robust evidence to demonstrate this. Age is not the key factor; instead, the focus should be on providing developmentally appropriate interventions and focusing on 'movement for movement's sake'.

FUTURE WORK

Future research should focus on developing, implementing, evaluating and comparing different approaches to early powered mobility.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018096449.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 50. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Plain language summary

The aim of this study was to find out the benefits and costs of providing very young children, aged < 5 years, with powered mobility devices. Examples of powered mobility devices are electrically powered wheelchairs and modified ride-on toys. We looked at many research papers about children and powered mobility. We found many benefits of powered mobility. We then combined all of the information to see if using powered mobility before the age of 5 years had any specific benefits for children. The evidence tells us that powered mobility has a positive effect on children’s movement, and it can boost children’s social interactions with other people, and their independence. Children using powered mobility were able to go to their friends by themselves, move around a play space as they wanted and take part in physical activities and games. We found that the fit between the child, the powered mobility device and the child’s everyday environment was important. When the fit was not good, children experienced a lot of problems. Some children and families felt that powered mobility did not suit their needs, leading to children using a manual wheelchair instead and thereby missing out on education, social opportunities and play. Barriers to powered mobility were found in the physical environment (e.g. inaccessible buildings) and the social environment (e.g. adults supervising children too closely) and often affected children’s independence. We found that the advantages and disadvantages of powered mobility were similar in younger and older children, even though the activities they took part in were different. We also found that each year the NHS spends < 2% of its wheelchair service budget on powered mobility for very young children. In conclusion, powered mobility can benefit very young children, but it requires a good fit with the child’s environment.

Full text of this article can be found in Bookshelf.

References

  1. Department for Work and Pensions. Family Resources Survey: Financial Year 2017/18. URL: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-resources-survey-financial-year-201718 (accessed 28 October 2019).
  2. Novak I, McIntyre S, Morgan C, Campbell L, Dark L, Morton N, et al. A systematic review of interventions for children with cerebral palsy: state of the evidence. Dev Med Child Neurol 2013;55:885–910. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12246 doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12246. [DOI] [PubMed]
  3. Scianni A, Butler JM, Ada L, Teixeira-Salmela LF. Muscle strengthening is not effective in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Aust J Physiother 2009;55:81–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-9514(09)70037-6 doi: 10.1016/S0004-9514(09)70037-6. [DOI] [PubMed]
  4. McPherson AC, Keith R, Swift JA. Obesity prevention for children with physical disabilities: a scoping review of physical activity and nutrition interventions. Disabil Rehabil 2014;36:1573–87. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.863391 doi: 10.3109/09638288.2013.863391. [DOI] [PubMed]
  5. Tatla SK, Sauve K, Virji-Babul N, Holsti L, Butler C, Van Der Loos HF. Evidence for outcomes of motivational rehabilitation interventions for children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: an American Academy for Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol 2013;55:593–601. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12147 doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12147. [DOI] [PubMed]
  6. Barton EE, Reichow B, Schnitz A, Smith IC, Sherlock D. A systematic review of sensory-based treatments for children with disabilities. Res Dev Disabil 2015;37:64–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.11.006 doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2014.11.006. [DOI] [PubMed]
  7. Morris C, Simkiss D, Busk M, Morris M, Allard A, Denness J, et al. Setting research priorities to improve the health of children and young people with neurodisability: a British Academy of Childhood Disability-James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership. BMJ Open 2015;5:e006233. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006233 doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006233. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  8. Morris C, Janssens A, Allard A, Thompson Coon J, Shilling V, Tomlinson R. Informing the NHS Outcomes Framework: what outcomes of NHS care should be measured for children with neurodisability? Health Serv Deliv Res 2014;2(15). https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr02150 doi: 10.3310/hsdr02150. [DOI]
  9. Uchiyama I, Anderson DI, Campos JJ, Witherington D, Frankel CB, Lejeune L, Barbu-Roth M. Locomotor experience affects self and emotion. Dev Psychol 2008;44:1225–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013224 doi: 10.1037/a0013224. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  10. Livingstone R, Field D. Systematic review of power mobility outcomes for infants, children and adolescents with mobility limitations. Clin Rehabil 2014;28:954–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215514531262 doi: 10.1177/0269215514531262. [DOI] [PubMed]
  11. Livingstone R, Field D. The child and family experience of power mobility: a qualitative synthesis. Dev Med Child Neurol 2015;57:317–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12633 doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12633. [DOI] [PubMed]
  12. Deitz J, Swinth Y, White O. Powered mobility and preschoolers with complex developmental delays. Am J Occup Ther 2002;56:86–96. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.56.1.86 doi: 10.5014/ajot.56.1.86. [DOI] [PubMed]
  13. Jones MA, McEwen IR, Hansen L. Use of power mobility for a young child with spinal muscular atrophy. Phys Ther 2003;83:253–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/83.3.253 doi: 10.1093/ptj/83.3.253. [DOI] [PubMed]
  14. Jones MA, McEwen IR, Neas BR. Effects of power wheelchairs on the development and function of young children with severe motor impairments. Pediatr Phys Ther 2012;24:131–40. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e31824c5fdc doi: 10.1097/PEP.0b013e31824c5fdc. [DOI] [PubMed]
  15. Tefft D, Guerette P, Furumasu J. The impact of early powered mobility on parental stress, negative emotions, and family social interactions. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2011;31:4–15. https://doi.org/10.3109/01942638.2010.529005 doi: 10.3109/01942638.2010.529005. [DOI] [PubMed]
  16. Tefft D, Guerette P, Furumasu J. Cognitive predictors of young children’s readiness for powered mobility. Dev Med Child Neurol 1999;41:665–70. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0012162299001371 doi: 10.1017/s0012162299001371. [DOI] [PubMed]
  17. Huang HH, Ragonesi CB, Stoner T, Peffley T, Galloway JC. Modified toy cars for mobility and socialization: case report of a child with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther 2014;26:76–84. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000001 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000001. [DOI] [PubMed]
  18. NHS Digital. Wheelchair Services: Operational Data Collection – Quarter 1 Dataset (April–June 2018). URL: www.england.nhs.uk/publication/wheelchair-services-operational-data-collection-quarter-1-dataset-april-june-2018/ (accessed 28 October 2019).
  19. Edwards R, Bryning L, Lloyd-Williams H. Exploring the case for investing in early years in Wales: a broad evidence review. Lancet 2016;388:S47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32283-8 doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32283-8. [DOI]
  20. Anderson LM, Petticrew M, Rehfuess E, Armstrong R, Ueffing E, Baker P, et al. Using logic models to capture complexity in systematic reviews. Res Synth Methods 2011;2:33–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.32 doi: 10.1002/jrsm.32. [DOI] [PubMed]
  21. Kneale D, Thomas J, Harris K. Developing and optimising the use of logic models in systematic reviews: exploring practice and good practice in the use of programme theory in reviews. PLOS ONE 2015;10:e0142187. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142187 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  22. Logan SW, Schreiber M, Lobo M, Pritchard B, George L, Galloway JC. Real-world performance: physical activity, play, and object-related behaviors of toddlers with and without disabilities. Pediatr Phys Ther 2015;27:433–41. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000181 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000181. [DOI] [PubMed]
  23. Bottos M, Bolcati C, Sciuto L, Ruggeri C, Feliciangeli A. Powered wheelchairs and independence in young children with tetraplegia. Dev Med Child Neurol 2001;43:769–77. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0012162201001402 doi: 10.1017/s0012162201001402. [DOI] [PubMed]
  24. Furumasu J, Tefft D, Guerette P. The Impact of Early Powered Mobility on Young Children’s Play and Psychosocial Skills. Paper presented at the International Seating Symposium, 24th Annual Meeting, Vancouver, BC, 6–8 March 2008.
  25. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
  26. Stein RE, Jessop DJ. A noncategorical approach to chronic childhood illness. Public Health Rep 1982;97:354–62. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  27. Varni JW, Seid M, Rode CA. The PedsQL™: measurement model for the pediatric quality of life inventory. Med Care 1999;37:126–39. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199902000-00003 doi: 10.1097/00005650-199902000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed]
  28. NIHR INVOLVE. Welcome to INVOLVE. 2019. URL: www.invo.org.uk/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  29. Hayes H, Buckland S, Tarpey M. Briefing Notes for Researchers: Public Involvement in NHS, Public Health and Social Care Research. 2012. URL: www.invo.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/9938_INVOLVE_Briefing_Notes_WEB.pdf (accessed 30 October 2019).
  30. Gov.uk. National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage Rates. 2019. URL: www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates (accessed 30 October 2019).
  31. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews – CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Systematic Reviews in Healthcare. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York; 2009.
  32. Bray N, Beyer FR, Craig D, Grayston A, Tudor-Edwards R, McAnuff J, et al. Early Mobility and POwered Wheelchair Evidence Review (EMPoWER): Cost-effectiveness of Earlier Provision of Powered Mobility Interventions for Children with Mobility Limitations; A Systematic Review. 2018. URL: www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=96449 (accessed 30 October 2019).
  33. Hong QN, Pluye P, Bujold M, Wassef M. Convergent and sequential synthesis designs: implications for conducting and reporting systematic reviews of qualitative and quantitative evidence. Syst Rev 2017;6:61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0454-2 doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0454-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  34. Brunton G, Thomas J, O’Mara-Eves A, Jamal F, Oliver S, Kavanagh J. Narratives of community engagement: a systematic review-derived conceptual framework for public health interventions. BMC Public Health 2017;17:944. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4958-4 doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4958-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  35. Lewin S, Glenton C, Munthe-Kaas H, Carlsen B, Colvin CJ, Gülmezoglu M, et al. Using qualitative evidence in decision making for health and social interventions: an approach to assess confidence in findings from qualitative evidence syntheses (GRADE-CERQual). PLOS Med 2015;12:e1001895. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001895 doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001895. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  36. Kolobe THA, Fagg AH. Robot reinforcement and error-based movement learning in infants with and without cerebral palsy. Phys Ther 2019;99:677–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzz043 doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzz043. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  37. Vorster N, Evans K, Murphy N, Kava M, Cairns A, Clarke D, et al. Powered standing wheelchairs promote independence, health and community involvement in adolescents with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord 2019;29:221–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nmd.2019.01.010 doi: 10.1016/j.nmd.2019.01.010. [DOI] [PubMed]
  38. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 2016;5:210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  39. Seo HJ, Kim SY, Lee YJ, Jang BH, Park JE, Sheen SS, Hahn SK. A newly developed tool for classifying study designs in systematic reviews of interventions and exposures showed substantial reliability and validity. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;70:200–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.09.013 doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.09.013. [DOI] [PubMed]
  40. Hartling L, Bond K, Santaguida PL, Viswanathan M, Dryden DM. Testing a tool for the classification of study designs in systematic reviews of interventions and exposures showed moderate reliability and low accuracy. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:861–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.010 doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.01.010. [DOI] [PubMed]
  41. Viswanathan M, Berkman ND, Dryden DM, Hartling L. Assessing Risk of Bias and confounding in Observational Studies of Interventions or Exposures: Further Development of the RTI Item Bank. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2013. URL: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK154461/ (accessed 26 February 2020). [PubMed]
  42. Higgins JPT, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Sterne JAC. Chapter 8: Assessing Risk of Bias in a Randomized Trial. In Higgins JPT, Green S, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 6.0 (updated July 2019). London: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2019. URL: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook (accessed 6 July 2020).
  43. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016;355:i4919. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919 doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4919. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  44. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. CASP Checklists. 2018. URL: https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/ (accessed 22 May 2018).
  45. Noyes J, Booth A, Flemming K, Garside R, Harden A, Lewin S, et al. Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series – paper 3: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings. J Clin Epidemiol 2018;97:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.020 doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.020. [DOI] [PubMed]
  46. Pace R, Pluye P, Bartlett G, Macaulay AC, Salsberg J, Jagosh J, Seller R. Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. Int J Nurs Stud 2012;49:47–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.07.002 doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.07.002. [DOI] [PubMed]
  47. Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ 2014;348:g1687. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g1687 doi: 10.1136/bmj.g1687. [DOI] [PubMed]
  48. McKenzie JE, Brennan SE. Chapter 12: Synthesizing and Presenting findings Using Other Methods. In, Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 6.0 (updated July 2019). London: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2019. URL: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook (accessed 6 July 2020).
  49. Teddlie C, Tashakkori A. Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2009.
  50. Richie J, Spencer L. Qualitative Data Analysis for Applied Policy Research. In Bryman A, Burgess RG, editors. Analyzing Qualitative Data. 1st edn. London: Routledge; 1994. pp. 173–94. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203413081_chapter_9 doi: 10.4324/9780203413081_chapter_9. [DOI]
  51. Ogilvie D, Fayter D, Petticrew M, Sowden A, Thomas S, Whitehead M, Worthy G. The harvest plot: a method for synthesising evidence about the differential effects of interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008;8:8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-8 doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  52. Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman Andrew D. Handbook for Grading the Quality of Evidence and the Strength of Recommendations Using the GRADE Approach. Updated October 2013. URL: https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html (accessed 26 February 2020).
  53. Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008;8:45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45 doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  54. Inman DP, Loge K, Cram A, Peterson M. Learning to drive a wheelchair in virtual reality. J Spec Educ Technol 2011;26:21–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341102600303 doi: 10.1177/016264341102600303. [DOI]
  55. Bamer AM, Connell FA, Dudgeon BJ, Johnson KL. Frequency of purchase and associated costs of assistive technology for Washington State Medicaid program enrollees with spina bifida by age. Disabil Health J 2010;3:155–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2009.10.009 doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2009.10.009. [DOI] [PubMed]
  56. University of Delaware. GoBabyGo! 2019. URL: https://sites.udel.edu/gobabygo/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  57. Galloway JC, Ryu JC, Agrawal SK. Babies driving robots: self-generated mobility in very young infants. Intell Serv Robot 2008;1:123–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-007-0011-2 doi: 10.1007/s11370-007-0011-2. [DOI]
  58. Pritchard-Wiart L, Bragg E, Thompson-Hodgetts S. The Young Movers Project: a case series describing modified toy car use as an early movement option for young children with mobility limitations. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2019;39:598–613. https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2019.1585403 doi: 10.1080/01942638.2019.1585403. [DOI] [PubMed]
  59. Evans S, Neophytou C, de Souza L, Frank AO. Young people’s experiences using electric powered indoor–outdoor wheelchairs (EPIOCs): potential for enhancing users’ development? Disabil Rehabil 2007;29:1281–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280600964406 doi: 10.1080/09638280600964406. [DOI] [PubMed]
  60. Feldner HA, Logan SW, Galloway JC. Mobility in pictures: a participatory photovoice narrative study exploring powered mobility provision for children and families. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2019;14:301–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2018.1447606 doi: 10.1080/17483107.2018.1447606. [DOI] [PubMed]
  61. Kenyon LK, Mortenson WB, Miller WC. ‘Power in Mobility’: parent and therapist perspectives of the experiences of children learning to use powered mobility. Dev Med Child Neurol 2018;60:1012–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.13906 doi: 10.1111/dmcn.13906. [DOI] [PubMed]
  62. Evans N, Baines R. Trends, goals and outcomes for children and families using early powered mobility in a charitable loan scheme. J Enabling Technol 2017;11:138–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/JET-08-2017-0032 doi: 10.1108/JET-08-2017-0032. [DOI]
  63. Agrawal SK, Kang J, Chen X, Kim MJ, Lee Y, Kong SW, et al. Robot-enhanced mobility training of children with cerebral palsy: short-term and long-term pilot studies. IEEE Syst J 2016;10:1098–106. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2014.2368455 doi: 10.1109/JSYST.2014.2368455. [DOI]
  64. Chen X, Ragonesi C, Galloway JC, Agrawal SK. Training toddlers seated on mobile robots to drive indoors amidst obstacles. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2011;19:271–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2011.2114370 doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2011.2114370. [DOI] [PubMed]
  65. Hasdai A, Jessel AS, Weiss PL. Use of a computer simulator for training children with disabilities in the operation of a powered wheelchair. Am J Occup Ther 1998;52:215–20. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.52.3.215 doi: 10.5014/ajot.52.3.215. [DOI] [PubMed]
  66. Lynch A, Ryu JC, Agrawal S, Galloway JC. Power mobility training for a 7-month-old infant with spina bifida. Pediatr Phys Ther 2009;21:362–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e3181bfae4c doi: 10.1097/PEP.0b013e3181bfae4c. [DOI] [PubMed]
  67. Marchal-Crespo L, Furumasu J, Reinkensmeyer DJ. A robotic wheelchair trainer: design overview and a feasibility study. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2010;7:40. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-7-40 doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-7-40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  68. McCourt E, Casey J. Electrically powered indoor/outdoor chair performance for children aged 7 to 9 years. Br J Occup Ther 2016;79:584–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308022616636405 doi: 10.1177/0308022616636405. [DOI]
  69. McGarry S, Moir L, Girdler S. The Smart Wheelchair: is it an appropriate mobility training tool for children with physical disabilities? Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2012;7:372–80. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2011.637283 doi: 10.3109/17483107.2011.637283. [DOI] [PubMed]
  70. Morère Y, Bourhis G, Cosnuau K, Guilmois G, Rumilly E, Blangy E. ViEW: a wheelchair simulator for driving analysis [published online ahead of print August 7 2018]. Assist Technol 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2018.1503204 doi: 10.1080/10400435.2018.1503204. [DOI] [PubMed]
  71. Torkia C, Ryan SE, Reid D, Boissy P, Lemay M, Routhier F, et al. Virtual community centre for power wheelchair training: experience of children and clinicians. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2019;14:46–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2017.1392622 doi: 10.1080/17483107.2017.1392622. [DOI] [PubMed]
  72. Ragonesi CB, Galloway JC. Short-term, early intensive power mobility training: case report of an infant at risk for cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther 2012;24:141–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e31824c764b doi: 10.1097/PEP.0b013e31824c764b. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  73. Nilsson L, Nyberg P, Eklund M. Training characteristics important for growing consciousness of joystick-use in people with profound cognitive disabilities. Int J Ther Rehabil 2010;17:588–95. https://doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2010.17.11.79539 doi: 10.12968/ijtr.2010.17.11.79539. [DOI]
  74. Nilsson LM, Nyberg PJ. Driving to learn: a new concept for training children with profound cognitive disabilities in a powered wheelchair. Am J Occup Ther 2003;57:229–33. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.57.2.229 doi: 10.5014/ajot.57.2.229. [DOI] [PubMed]
  75. Kenyon LK, Farris JP, Aldrich NJ, Rhodes S. Does power mobility training impact a child’s mastery motivation and spectrum of EEG activity? An exploratory project. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2018;13:665–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2017.1369587 doi: 10.1080/17483107.2017.1369587. [DOI] [PubMed]
  76. Kenyon LK, Farris J, Brockway K, Hannum N, Proctor K. Promoting self-exploration and function through an individualized power mobility training program. Pediatr Phys Ther 2015;27:200–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000129 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000129. [DOI] [PubMed]
  77. Huang HH, Chen CL. The use of modified ride-on cars to maximize mobility and improve socialization – a group design. Res Dev Disabil 2017;61:172–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2017.01.002 doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2017.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed]
  78. Huang HH, Chen YM, Huang HW. Ride-on car training for behavioral changes in mobility and socialization among young children with disabilities. Pediatr Phys Ther 2017;29:207–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000426 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000426. [DOI] [PubMed]
  79. Huang HH, Chen YM, Huang HW, Shih MK, Hsieh YH, Chen CL. Modified ride-on cars and young children with disabilities: effects of combining mobility and social training. Front Pediatr 2017;5:299. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2017.00299 doi: 10.3389/fped.2017.00299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  80. Huang HH, Huang HW, Chen YM, Hsieh YH, Shih MK, Chen CL. Modified ride-on cars and mastery motivation in young children with disabilities: effects of environmental modifications. Res Dev Disabil 2018;83:37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2018.08.001 doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2018.08.001. [DOI] [PubMed]
  81. Furumasu J, Guerette P, Tefft D. The development of a powered wheelchair mobility program for young children. Technol Disabil 1996;5:41–8. https://doi.org/10.3233/TAD-1996-5106 doi: 10.3233/TAD-1996-5106. [DOI]
  82. Zeng Q, Burdet E, Teo CL. Evaluation of a collaborative wheelchair system in cerebral palsy and traumatic brain injury users. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009;23:494–504. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968308323692 doi: 10.1177/1545968308323692. [DOI] [PubMed]
  83. Ragonesi CB, Chen X, Agrawal S, Galloway JC. Power mobility and socialization in preschool: follow-up case study of a child with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther 2011;23:399–406. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e318235266a doi: 10.1097/PEP.0b013e318235266a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  84. Nicholson J, Bonsall M. Powered mobility for children under five years of age in England. Br J Occup Ther 2002;65:291–3. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802260206500608 doi: 10.1177/030802260206500608. [DOI]
  85. Montesano L, Díaz M, Bhaskar S, Minguez J. Towards an intelligent wheelchair system for users with cerebral palsy. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2010;18:193–202. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2009.2039592 doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2009.2039592. [DOI] [PubMed]
  86. Kenyon LK, Farris JP, Gallagher C, Hammond L, Webster LM, Aldrich NJ. Power mobility training for young children with multiple, severe impairments: a case series. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2017;37:19–34. https://doi.org/10.3109/01942638.2015.1108380 doi: 10.3109/01942638.2015.1108380. [DOI] [PubMed]
  87. Logan SW, Hospodar CM, Feldner HA, Huang HH, Galloway JC. Modified ride-on car use by young children with disabilities. Pediatr Phys Ther 2018;30:50–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000468 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000468. [DOI] [PubMed]
  88. Logan SW, Huang HH, Stahlin K, Galloway JC. Modified ride-on car for mobility and socialization: single-case study of an infant with Down syndrome. Pediatr Phys Ther 2014;26:418–26. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000070 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000070. [DOI] [PubMed]
  89. Butler C. Effects of powered mobility on self-initiated behaviors of very young children with locomotor disability. Dev Med Child Neurol 1986;28:325–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1986.tb03881.x doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.1986.tb03881.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  90. Logan SW, Lobo MA, Feldner HA, Schreiber M, MacDonald M, Winden HN, et al. Power-Up: exploration and play in a novel modified ride-on car for standing. Pediatr Phys Ther 2017;29:30–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000336 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000336. [DOI] [PubMed]
  91. Odor J, Watson M. Learning Through Smart Wheelchairs: A Formative Evaluation of the Effective Use of the CALL Centre’s Smart Wheelchairs as Part of Children’s Emerging Mobility, Communication, Education, and Personal Development. Final Report. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh; 1994. URL: www.callscotland.org.uk/Common-Assets/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Learning%20Through%20Smart%20Wheelchairs%20complete.pdf (accessed 6 July 2020).
  92. Stokes M, Cook E, Sanders C, Coker-Bolt P. The case for early power mobility: developmental outcomes for a toddler born with a rare neuromuscular disorder. Technol Special Interest Section Q 2014;24:1–3.
  93. Weinstein ML, Lloyd M, finch KA, Laszacs AD. Underappreciated challenges to pediatric powered mobility – ways to address them as illustrated by a case report. Assist Technol 2018;30:74–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2016.1257520 doi: 10.1080/10400435.2016.1257520. [DOI] [PubMed]
  94. Dennis CW, Stansfeld S, Larin HM. Effect of Providing Powered Mobility on Infants’ Social Behavior and Vocalization: Two Case Studies. Paper presented at the Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA) annual conference, New Orleans, LA, 26–30 June 2017.
  95. Paulsson K, Christoffersen M. Psychosocial Aspects of Technical Aids: How does Independent Mobility Affect the Psychosocial and Intellectual Development of Children with Physical Disabilities? Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference of the Rehabilitation Engineering Society of North America, Ottawa, ON, 17–22 June 1984.
  96. Ragonesi CB, Chen X, Agrawal S, Galloway JC. Power mobility and socialization in preschool: a case study of a child with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther 2010;22:322–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e3181eab240 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0b013e3181eab240. [DOI] [PubMed]
  97. Ross SM, Catena M, Twardzik E, Hospodar C, Cook E, Ayyagari A, et al. Feasibility of a modified ride-on car intervention on play behaviors during an inclusive playgroup. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2018;38:493–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2017.1400491 doi: 10.1080/01942638.2017.1400491. [DOI] [PubMed]
  98. Sharma N, Morrison J. Don’t Push Me Around! Disabled Children’s Experiences of Wheelchair Services in the UK. London: Whizz-Kids; 2007. URL: www.whizz-kidz.org.uk/uploads/general/Support_us/Trusts__statutory_and_lottery/dont_push_me_around_report.pdf (accessed 26 February 2020).
  99. Gudgeon S, Kirk S. Living with a powered wheelchair: exploring children’s and young people’s experiences. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2015;10:118–25. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2013.870609 doi: 10.3109/17483107.2013.870609. [DOI] [PubMed]
  100. Pituch E, Rushton PW, Ngo M, Heales J, Poulin Arguin A. Powerful or powerless? Children’s, parents’, and occupational therapists’ perceptions of powered mobility. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2018;39(3):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2018.1496964 doi: 10.1080/01942638.2018.1496964. [DOI] [PubMed]
  101. Sonday A, Gretschel P. Empowered to play: a case study describing the impact of powered mobility on the exploratory play of disabled children. Occup Ther Int 2016;23:11–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/oti.1395 doi: 10.1002/oti.1395. [DOI] [PubMed]
  102. Wiart L, Darrah J, Hollis V, Cook A, May L. Mothers’ perceptions of their children’s use of powered mobility. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2004;24:3–21. https://doi.org/10.1300/J006v24n04_02 doi: 10.1300/J006v24n04_02. [DOI] [PubMed]
  103. Cerruti M, Biondi R. Timely insertion of electronic wheelchair in overall rehabilitation plan for cerebral palsy in young children: investigation on the opinion of parents. Sci Riabil 2010;12:14–23.
  104. Kornafel T, Tsao EY, Sabelhaus E, Surges L, Apkon SD. Physical and occupational therapy for a teenager with acute flaccid myelitis: a case report. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2017;37:485–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2016.1255289 doi: 10.1080/01942638.2016.1255289. [DOI] [PubMed]
  105. Currier BA, Jones MA, DeGrace BW. Experiences of families with young power wheelchair users. J Early Interv 2019;41:125–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815118819204 doi: 10.1177/1053815118819204. [DOI]
  106. Home AM, Ham R. Provision of powered mobility equipment to young children: the Whizz-Kidz experience. Int J Ther Rehabil 2003;10:511–7. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjtr.2003.10.11.13462 doi: 10.12968/bjtr.2003.10.11.13462. [DOI]
  107. Kakimoto A, Suzuki S, Sekiguchi Y. Development of a cart for independent mobility assistance for non-ambulatory children. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2009;2009:7273–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5334838 doi: 10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5334838. [DOI] [PubMed]
  108. Gehant BA. Evaluation of the CAPP cart. Artif Limbs 1971;15:16–24. [PubMed]
  109. Durkin J. Discovering powered mobility skills with children: ‘responsive partners’ in learning. Int J Ther Rehabil 2009;16:331–41. https://doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2009.16.6.42436 doi: 10.12968/ijtr.2009.16.6.42436. [DOI]
  110. Jonasson M. The AKKA-board – performing mobility, disability and innovation. Disabil Soc 2014;29:47–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.823079 doi: 10.1080/09687599.2013.823079. [DOI]
  111. Mockler SR, McEwen IR, Jones MA. Retrospective analysis of predictors of proficient power mobility in young children with severe motor impairments. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2017;98:2034–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2017.05.028 doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.05.028. [DOI] [PubMed]
  112. Uyama S, Hanaki K. Current status of the utilization of powered wheelchair in preschool children with locomotive disability in Japan. Phys Ther Res 2016;19:13–23. https://doi.org/10.1298/ptr.E9888 doi: 10.1298/ptr.E9888. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  113. Lovett S. Discrimination learning in multiply handicapped children using an electromechanical car. Adv Behav Res Ther 1988;10:39–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6402(88)90010-0 doi: 10.1016/0146-6402(88)90010-0. [DOI]
  114. Omori K, Sugimoto Y, Kitayama I. Development of Power Wheelchair with Support Functions for Learning how to Operate – Trial at a School for Children with Physical or Developmental Disabilities. In Ohnabe H, Collins DM, editors. Selected Papers from the Japanese Conference on the Advancement of Assistive and Rehabilitation Technology. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2011. pp. 67–71.
  115. Douglas J, Ryan M. A preschool severely disabled boy and his powered wheelchair: a case study. Child Care Health Dev 1987;13:303–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.1987.tb00547.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.1987.tb00547.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  116. Feldner H. Impacts of early powered mobility provision on disability identity: a case study. Rehabil Psychol 2019;64:130–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000259 doi: 10.1037/rep0000259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  117. Nilsson L, Eklund M, Nyberg P, Thulesius H. Driving to learn in a powered wheelchair: the process of learning joystick use in people with profound cognitive disabilities. Am J Occup Ther 2011;65:652–60. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2011.001750 doi: 10.5014/ajot.2011.001750. [DOI] [PubMed]
  118. Logan SW, Feldner HA, Galloway JC, Huang HH. Modified ride-on car use by children with complex medical needs. Pediatr Phys Ther 2016;28:100–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000210 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000210. [DOI] [PubMed]
  119. Zazula JL, Foulds RA. Mobility device for a child with phocomelia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1983;64:137–9. [PubMed]
  120. Ceres R, Pons JL, Calderon L, Jimenez AR, Azevedo L. A robotic vehicle for disabled children. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 2005;24:55–63. https://doi.org/10.1109/MEMB.2005.1549731 doi: 10.1109/MEMB.2005.1549731. [DOI] [PubMed]
  121. Logan SW, Catena MA, Sabet A, Hospodar CM, Yohn H, Govindan A, Galloway JC. Standing tall: feasibility of a modified ride-on car that encourages standing. Pediatr Phys Ther 2019;31:E6–E13. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000568 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0000000000000568. [DOI] [PubMed]
  122. Flodin E. Interactive design – the desire for autonomous upright mobility: a longitudinal case study. Technol Disabil 2007;19:213–24. https://doi.org/10.3233/TAD-2007-19407 doi: 10.3233/TAD-2007-19407. [DOI]
  123. Smania N, Gandolfi M, Marconi V, Calanca A, Geroin C, Piazza S, et al. Applicability of a new robotic walking aid in a patient with cerebral palsy. Case report. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2012;48:147–53. [PubMed]
  124. Guerette P, Furumasu J, Tefft D. The positive effects of early powered mobility on children’s psychosocial and play skills. Assist Technol 2013;25:39–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2012.685824 doi: 10.1080/10400435.2012.685824. [DOI] [PubMed]
  125. Pope PM, Bowes CE, Booth E. Postural control in sitting the SAM system: evaluation of use over three years. Dev Med Child Neurol 1994;36:241–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1994.tb11837.x doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.1994.tb11837.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  126. Butler C, Okamoto GA, McKay TM. Motorized wheelchair driving by disabled children. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1984;65:95–7. [PubMed]
  127. Dunaway S, Montes J, O’Hagen J, Sproule DM, Vivo DC, Kaufmann P. Independent mobility after early introduction of a power wheelchair in spinal muscular atrophy. J Child Neurol 2013;28:576–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0883073812449383 doi: 10.1177/0883073812449383. [DOI] [PubMed]
  128. Schoepflin ZR, Chen X, Ragonesi CB, Galloway JC, Agrawal SK. Design of a novel mobility device controlled by the feet motion of a standing child: a feasibility study. Med Biol Eng Comput 2011;49:1225–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-011-0820-5 doi: 10.1007/s11517-011-0820-5. [DOI] [PubMed]
  129. Larin HM, Dennis CW, Stansfield S. Development of robotic mobility for infants: rationale and outcomes. Physiotherapy 2012;98:230–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2012.06.005 doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2012.06.005. [DOI] [PubMed]
  130. Huhn K, Guarrera-Bowlby P, Deutsch JE. The clinical decision-making process of prescribing power mobility for a child with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther 2007;19:254–60. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e31812c65cc doi: 10.1097/PEP.0b013e31812c65cc. [DOI] [PubMed]
  131. Frank AO, De Souza LH, Frank JL, Neophytou C. The pain experiences of powered wheelchair users. Disabil Rehabil 2012;34:770–8. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2011.619620 doi: 10.3109/09638288.2011.619620. [DOI] [PubMed]
  132. Wiart L, Darrah J, Cook A, Hollis V, May L. Evaluation of powered mobility use in home and community environments. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr 2003;23:59–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/J006v23n02_05 doi: 10.1080/J006v23n02_05. [DOI] [PubMed]
  133. Berry ET, McLaurin SE, Sparling JW. Parent/caregiver perspectives on the use of power wheelchairs. Pediatr Phys Ther 1996;8:146–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001577-199608040-00002 doi: 10.1097/00001577-199608040-00002. [DOI]
  134. Cronin S. Exploring the Lived Experiences of Children with Specialised Wheelchair and Seating Needs from a Family Perspective. PhD thesis. Limerick: University of Limerick; 2012.
  135. Sullivan SD, Mauskopf JA, Augustovski F, Jaime Caro J, Lee KM, Minchin M, et al. Budget impact analysis-principles of good practice: report of the ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force. Value Health 2014;17:5–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2013.08.2291 doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.08.2291. [DOI] [PubMed]
  136. Department for Work and Pensions. Family Resources Survey 2017/18. URL: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-resources-survey-financial-year-201718 (accessed 30 October 2019).
  137. Motability. What Age Can I First Receive the Mobility Allowance? URL: www.motability.org.uk/contact/faqs/what-age-can-i-receive-the-mobility-allowance (accessed 30 October 2019).
  138. Office for National Statistics. United Kingdom Population Mid-year Estimate 2019. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/timeseries/ukpop/pop (accessed 30 October 2019).
  139. NHS Digital. Wheelchair Services: Operational Data Collection – Quarter 4 Dataset 2017/18 (January–March 2018). URL: www.england.nhs.uk/publication/wheelchair-services-operational-data-collection-quarter-4-dataset-2017-18-january-march-2018/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  140. NHS Digital. Wheelchair Services: Operational Data Collection – Quarter 2 Dataset (July–September 2018). URL: www.england.nhs.uk/publication/wheelchair-services-operational-data-collection-quarter-2-dataset-july-september-2018/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  141. NHS Digital. Wheelchair Services: Operational Data Collection – Quarter 3 Dataset (October–December 2018). URL: www.england.nhs.uk/publication/wheelchair-services-operational-data-collection-quarter-3-dataset-october-december-2018/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  142. NHS Improvement. Reference Costs. 2018. URL: https://improvement.nhs.uk/resources/reference-costs/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  143. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health. Strings Attached: CADTH’s Database of Search Filters. 2016. URL: www.cadth.ca/resources/finding-evidence/strings-attached-cadths-database-search-filters (accessed 22 October 2018).
  144. Bank of England. Inflation Calculator. 2019. URL: www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator (accessed 30 October 2019).
  145. Designability. Wizzybug Loan Scheme: Information Sheet. 2019. URL: https://designability.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/FRM-011-Wizzybug-Loan-Scheme-Information-Sheet-3.0-6th-November-2017.pdf (accessed 30 October 2019).
  146. MERU. Bugzi Loan Scheme – Bugzi Deposit. 2019. URL: https://meru.org.uk/product/bugzi-loan-scheme-bugzi-deposit/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  147. NHS England. Personal Wheelchair Budgets. 2019. URL: www.england.nhs.uk/personal-health-budgets/personal-wheelchair-budgets/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  148. Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2018. URL: www.pssru.ac.uk/project-pages/unit-costs/unit-costs-2018/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  149. NHS England. Developing a Wheelchair Tariff Pilot Programme. London: NHS England; 2016. URL: www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/rep-deve-wheelchair-tariffs.pdf (accessed 30 October 2019).
  150. Dragonmobility. SnapDragon. 2019. URL: www.dragonmobility.com/snapdragon.php (accessed 30 October 2019).
  151. Bray N. More Than Mobility: Applying Health Economics to Wheelchair Interventions for Disabled Children. PhD thesis. Bangor: Bangor University; 2016.
  152. NHS UK. How to Care for a Disabled Child. 2019. URL: www.nhs.uk/conditions/social-care-and-support-guide/caring-for-children-and-young-people/how-to-care-for-a-disabled-child/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  153. Whizz-Kids. Wheelchair Skills Training. 2019. URL: www.whizz-kidz.org.uk/get-our-help/young-people/wheelchair-skills-training (accessed 30 October 2019).
  154. Go Kids Go! Wheelchairs Skills Workshops. 2019. URL: https://go-kids-go.org.uk/go-kids-go-workshops.php (accessed 30 October 2019).
  155. Go Kids Go! Report of the Trustees and Unaudited Financial Statements for the Year Ended 31 January 2018 for Go Kids Go! Association of Wheelchair Children. 2018. URL: https://go-kids-go.org.uk/PDFS/2018%20Accounts.pdf (accessed 30 October 2019).
  156. Equality and Human Rights Commission. Housing and Disabled People. A Toolkit for Local Authorities in England: Adaptations. 2018. URL: www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/housing-and-disabled-people-local-authorities-toolkit-england-adaptations.pdf (accessed 30 October 2019).
  157. Motability. Charitable Grants. 2019. URL: www.motability.org.uk/grants/ (accessed 30 October 2019).
  158. Department for Education. Home to School Travel and Transport Guidance. Statutory Guidance for Local Authorities. 2014. URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/575323/Home_to_school_travel_and_transport_guidance.pdf (accessed 30 October 2019).
  159. Curtis L, Beecham J. A survey of local authorities and Home Improvement Agencies: identifying the hidden costs of providing a home adaptations service. Br J Occup Ther 2018;81:633–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308022618771534 doi: 10.1177/0308022618771534. [DOI]
  160. Bray N, Noyes J, Edwards RT, Harris N. Wheelchair interventions, services and provision for disabled children: a mixed-method systematic review and conceptual framework. BMC Health Serv Res 2014;14:309. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-309 doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-309. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  161. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, Seers K, Mockford C, Goodlad S, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. BMJ 2017;358:j3453. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j3453 doi: 10.1136/bmj.j3453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  162. Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL, Gutmann ML, Hanson WE. Advanced Mixed Methods Research Designs. In Tashakkori A, Teddlie C, editors. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2003. pp. 209–40.
  163. Noyes J, Booth A, Moore G, Flemming K, Tunçalp Ö, Shakibazadeh E. Synthesising quantitative and qualitative evidence to inform guidelines on complex interventions: clarifying the purposes, designs and outlining some methods. BMJ Glob Health 2019;4:e000893. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000893 doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000893. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  164. Heyvaert M, Hannes K, Onghena P. Using Mixed Methods Research Synthesis for Literature Reviews. 1st edn: Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2016. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506333243 doi: 10.4135/9781506333243. [DOI]
  165. Fetters MD, Molina-Azorin JF. The Journal of Mixed Methods Research starts a new decade: the mixed methods research integration trilogy and its dimensions. J Mixed Methods Res 2017;11:291–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817714066 doi: 10.1177/1558689817714066. [DOI]
  166. Movsisyan A, Dennis J, Rehfuess E, Grant S, Montgomery P. Rating the quality of a body of evidence on the effectiveness of health and social interventions: a systematic review and mapping of evidence domains. Res Synth Methods 2018;9:224–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1290 doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1290. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  167. Johnson SD, Tilley N, Bowers KJ. Introducing EMMIE: an evidence rating scale to encourage mixed-method crime prevention synthesis reviews. J Exp Criminol 2015;11:459–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-015-9238-7 doi: 10.1007/s11292-015-9238-7. [DOI]
  168. Cooper RA, Tolerico M, Kaminski BA, Spaeth D, Ding D, Cooper R. Quantifying wheelchair activity of children: a pilot study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2008;87:977–83. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0b013e31818dfe74 doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31818dfe74. [DOI] [PubMed]
  169. Huang HH, Galloway JC. Modified ride-on toy cars for early power mobility: a technical report. Pediatr Phys Ther 2012;24:149–54. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e31824d73f9 doi: 10.1097/PEP.0b013e31824d73f9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  170. Furumasu J. Powered mobility readiness: a case study. Directions, 2015;6:42–6. URL: https://nrrts.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/DIRECTIONS_2015.6_RehabCaseStudy.pdf (accessed 1 November 2019).
  171. Andrich R, Salatino C, Converti RM, Saruggia M. Cost-effectiveness of powered wheelchairs: findings of a study. Stud Health Technol Inform 2015;217:84–91. [PubMed]
  172. Barnard AM, Nelson NG, Xiang H, McKenzie LB. Pediatric mobility aid-related injuries treated in US emergency departments from 1991 to 2008. Pediatrics 2010;125:1200–7. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-3286 doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-3286. [DOI] [PubMed]
  173. Bartonek A, Saraste H, Danielsson A. Health-related quality of life and ambulation in children with myelomeningocele in a Swedish population. Acta Paediatr 2012;101:953–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2012.02742.x doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2012.02742.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  174. Bloemen MA, Verschuren O, van Mechelen C, Borst HE, de Leeuw AJ, van der Hoef M, de Groot JF. Personal and environmental factors to consider when aiming to improve participation in physical activity in children with spina bifida: a qualitative study. BMC Neurol 2015;15:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-015-0265-9 doi: 10.1186/s12883-015-0265-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  175. Butler C. Measuring participation for children with mobility limitations: a modified Delphi survey for those who use power mobility. Dev Med Child Neurol 2015;57:500. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12648 doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12648. [DOI] [PubMed]
  176. Douglas J, Reeson B, Ryan M. Computer microtechnology for a severely disabled preschool child. Child Care Health Dev 1988;14:93–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.1988.tb00566.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.1988.tb00566.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  177. Ekiz T, Özbudak Demir S, Sümer HG, Özgirgin N. Wheelchair appropriateness in children with cerebral palsy: a single center experience. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2017;30:825–8. https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-150522 doi: 10.3233/BMR-150522. [DOI] [PubMed]
  178. Field DA, Miller WC, Ryan SE, Jarus T, Abundo A. Measuring participation for children and youth with power mobility needs: a systematic review of potential health measurement tools. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016;97:462–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2015.08.428 doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.08.428. [DOI] [PubMed]
  179. Sanders DA. Non-model-based control of a wheeled vehicle pulling two trailers to provide early powered mobility and driving experiences. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2018;26:96–104. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2017.2726443 doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2017.2726443. [DOI] [PubMed]
  180. Motability. Making a Difference: Information for Advisors and Professionals. URL: www.motability.org.uk/Motability_Professional_Guide.pdf (accessed 6 July 2020).

RESOURCES