Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Purpose The links between disability, activity limitation and participation restriction are well established. Recent and continued advancement of technology, particularly smart home and communication technologies, presents new ways in which some of the limitations and restrictions experienced by people with disabilities can be overcome. The aim of this scoping review was to explore the impact of smart home and communication technology on the outcomes of people with disabilities and complex needs.Method This review involved systematic searching of four databases, hand searches and data extraction. Eligibility criteria included 1 Gentry T. Smart homes for people with neurological disability: state of the art. NeuroRehabilitation. 2009;25(3):209–217.[Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science ® , Google Scholar] participant outcomes of 2 Brownsell S, Bradley D, Blackburn S, et al. A systematic review of lifestyle monitoring technologies. J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(4):185–189.[Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science ® , Google Scholar] technology used within the home [3 Lund ML, Lövgren-Engström AL, Lexell J. Using everyday technology to compensate for difficulties in task performance in daily life: experiences in persons with acquired brain injury and their significant others. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2011;6(5):402–411.[Taylor however, high-quality evidence documenting the impact of technology is lacking.Soft-technology supports, including assessment, training and evaluation of technology implementation, may play just as important a role in shaping outcomes as the technology itself.Systematic research is required to ensure there is quality evidence to inform investment in both technologies, and the soft-technology supports that promote its successful use.
Jamwal et al. (Sat,) studied this question.