Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an optimized process of providing assistive technology for impaired upper extremity function: Protocol of a prospective, quasi-experimental non-randomized study (OMARM)

U.R. Roentgen, Loek A. van der Heide, Ingrid Kremer*, H. Creemers, Merel A. Brehm, J. Groothuis, E. Hagedoren, Ramon Daniels, Silvia Evers

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review


BACKGROUND: Impaired upper extremity function due to muscle paresis or paralysis has a major impact on independent living
and quality of life (QoL). Assistive technology (AT) for upper extremity function (i.e. dynamic arm supports and robotic arms) can
increase a client’s independence. Previous studies revealed that clients often use AT not to their full potential, due to suboptimal
provision of these devices in usual care.

OBJECTIVE: To optimize the process of providing AT for impaired upper extremity function and to evaluate its (cost-)
effectiveness compared with care as usual.

METHODS: Development of a protocol to guide the AT provision process in an optimized way according to generic Dutch
guidelines; a quasi-experimental study with non-randomized, consecutive inclusion of a control group (n = 48) receiving care as
usual and of an intervention group (optimized provision process) (n = 48); and a cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis from
societal perspective will be performed. The primary outcome is clients’ satisfaction with the AT and related services, measured
with the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with AT (Dutch version; D-QUEST). Secondary outcomes comprise complaints
of the upper extremity, restrictions in activities, QoL, medical consumption and societal cost. Measurements are taken at baseline
and at 3, 6 and 9 months follow-up.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)207-220
Number of pages14
JournalTechnology and Disability
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2021

Cite this