An overview of existing head supports for people with reduced or altered head mobility: current solutions and future developments

The first objective of this research was to create an overview of existing assistive devices for supporting the head of people with decreased or altered head mobility. The second objective was to identify future research opportunities, also by investigating what functionalities are still missing in the current head support solutions. A systematic literature review was performed, combined with searches in technology manufacturer databases and websites, to get an overview of existing head support solutions. Expert opinions were gathered, as well as feedback from a number of head support users by means of semi-structured interviews. A database was constructed from the assistive devices that were found. Devices were categorized with respect to type of interface with the user, functionality and amount of adjustability in the system. Existing solutions that stabilize the head are mainly static, meaning that the head can only be stabilized in one position. Some systems offer freedom of movement but do not really support the head. Additionally, some systems can be configured such that there is a certain level of adaptability to the user. However, if head support systems are adjustable, most often it are systems which enable the caregiver and/or end user to manually change the head support to another position. Based on feedback from experts and users it can be concluded that there is a need for assistive devices that provide independent adjustability in such a way that changes in position of the trunk and head are combined with continuous stabilization. Combining this need with current developments in robotic assistive devices, recommendations are given for future research on head supports

An overview of head support solutions for people with reduced or altered head mobility

Objective: To create an overview of existing assistive devices for supporting the head of people with decreased or altered head mobility. Additionally, to investigate if there are any functionalities missing in the current head support solutions. Search strategy: A systematic literature review was performed, combined with searches in technology manufacturer databases and websites, to get an overview of existing head support solutions. Expert opinions were gathered, as well as feedback from a number of head support users by means of semi-structured interviews. Selection of articles: A database was constructed from the assistive devices that were found. Evaluation of articles and results: Devices were categorized with respect to type of interface with the user, functionality and amount of adjustability in the system. Conclusion: Existing solutions that stabilize the head are mainly static, meaning that the head can only be stabilized in one position. Some systems offer freedom of movement but do not really support the head. Additionally, some systems can be configured such that there is a certain level of adaptability to the user. However, if head support systems are adjustable, most often it are systems which enable the caregiver and/or end user to manually change the head support to another position. Based on feedback from experts and users there can be concluded that there is a need for assistive devices that provide independent adjustability in such a way that changes in position of the trunk and head are combined with continuous stabilization

How could the service delivery process of dynamic arm supports be optimized?

BACKGROUND: The service delivery process of dynamic arm support (DAS) is complex. Obtaining an optimal match between user and DAS depends on a variety of interrelated factors, different professionals are involved, and the market of available solutions is evolving. OBJECTIVE: To determine how the service delivery process of DAS could be optimized. METHODS: Interviews with DAS users that retrospectively focused on the experienced service delivery process, which was compared to the general Dutch prescription guideline. Results were presented in a focus group session to seven DAS consultants, and subsequently verified by a member-check. RESULTS: Sixteen people who considered the Gowing (a DAS new on the market) as a solution and seven DAS consultants participated. Aspects that can be optimized in the current service delivery process included an improved cooperation between clients, professionals and consultants, increased knowledge of DAS in professionals, an embedded user evaluation, and timely delivery. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that the service delivery process is optimized by developing a DAS specific prescription framework. The issues identified in this study should be addressed in this framework. For this additional knowledge on how to optimally match persons and DAS is needed

Head support in wheelchairs (scoping review): state-of-the-art and beyond

Background Many wheelchair users experience disabilities in stabilising and positioning of the head. For these users, adequate head support is required. Although several types of head supports are available, further development of these systems is needed to improve functionality and quality of life, especially for the group of severely challenged users. For this group, user needs have not been clearly established. In this article, we provide an overview of the state-of-the-art in wheelchair mounted head supports and associated scientific evidence in order to identify requirements for the next generation of head support systems. Materials and methods A scoping review was performed including scientific literature (PubMed/Scopus), patents (Espacenet/Google Scholar) and commercial information. Types of head support and important system characteristics for future head support systems were proposed from consultations with wheelchair users (n = 3), occupational therapists (n = 3) and an expert panel. Results Forty scientific papers, 90 patents and 80 descriptions of commercial devices were included in the scoping review. The identified head support systems were categorised per head support type. Only limited scientific clinical evidence with respect to the effectiveness of existing head support systems was found. From the user and expert consultations, a need was identified for personalised head support systems that intuitively combine changes in sitting and head position with continuous optimal support of the head to accommodate severely challenged users. Conclusions This study presents the state-of-the-art in head support systems. Additionally, several important system characteristics are introduced that provide guidance for the development and improvement of head supports