Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0)

Download Clinical Summary PDF

Tool Description

  • Designed to evaluate a person’s satisfaction with a wide range of assistive technology (AT).
  • Current version of the scale covers two dimensions:

1. satisfaction with the device
2. satisfaction with the service from the vendor/manufacturer.

  • Items in the satisfaction with the device domain include dimensions, weight, adjustments, safety, durability, simplicity of use, comfort and effectiveness.
  • The satisfaction with the service from the vendor/manufacturer domain includes service delivery, repairs and service of the device, professionalism of service, and follow-up service.

ICF Domain:

Environmental Factors

Number of Items:

12

Brief Instructions for Administration & Scoring

Administration:

  • Self-administration or interview format.
  • Response categories range from 1 (not satisfied at all) to 5 (very satisfied).
  • Administration time is approximately 10-15 minutes.

Equipment: None.

Scoring:

  • The QUEST yields three scores: Device, Services, and a total QUEST, calculated by summing and then averaging valid responses to assigned items.

Interpretability

MCID: not established in SCI
SEM: not established in SCI
MDC: not established in SCI

  • No information on important cut points or responsiveness (sensitivity to change) is available for the SCI population.
  • Published data for the SCI population is available for comparison (see Interpretability section of the Study Details sheet).

Languages:

English, French, Chinese, Taiwanese, Dutch, Portuguese, Norwegian and Japanese.

Training Required:

None.

Availability:

Must be purchased from http://www.abledata.com/abledata.cfm?pageid=113583&top=0&productid=189455&trail=0

Clinical Considerations

  • The tool is both simple to use and simple to score.
  • Reliability and validity studies for SCI have only been conducted with the Chinese version of the QUEST. In the self-administered format, the QUEST demands minimal skills to circle or mark the responses on the rating scale and to write comments. When the interview format is used, some interactive optional material is provided, including a list of 12 satisfaction items printed in large font and an enlarged rating scale displaying the 5-point degrees of satisfaction.

Measurement Property Summary

# of studies reporting psychometric properties: 3

Reliability:

  • Internal consistency is High for the:
    • QUEST (Cronbach’s a=0.82)
    • Devices subscale of QUEST (Cronbach’s a=0.84)
    • Services subscale of QUEST (Cronbach’s a=0.85)

[Chan and Chan 2006]

Validity:

  • Correlation for the QUEST Device subscale is Moderate with the WHO Quality Of Life-Bref (HK version) (r=0.412), and the WHOQOL-Bref subscales: Physical (r=0.508), Psychological (r=0.344), Social Relationship (r=0.460) and Environment (r=0.567).
  • Correlation for the QUEST Services subscale is Low with the WHO Quality Of Life-Bref (HK version) (r=0.120) and WHOQOL Psychological (r=0.023) and Social Relationship (r=0.242) subscales; and Moderate with the WHOQOL-Bref Physical (r=0.307) and Environment (r=0.333) subscales.

[Chan and Chan 2006, Chan and Chan 2007]

Responsiveness:

No values were reported for responsiveness of the QUEST for the SCI population.

Floor/ceiling effect:

No values were reported for the presence of floor/ceiling effects in the QUEST for the SCI population.

Reviewer

Dr. Ben Mortenson, Jeff Tan, John Zhu, Jeremy Mak

Date Last Updated:

Mar 16, 2017

Download the measure

Download Worksheet:
Must be purchased from http://www.abledata.com/abledata.cfm?pageid=113583&top=0&productid=189455&trail=0

Video

n/a

Scoring

n/a

Equipment Needed

QUEST:

Bergstrom AL and Samuelsson K. Evaluation of manual wheelchairs by individuals with spinal cord injuries. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2006, 1(3): 175-182.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19260185

Chan SC, Chan AP. The validity and applicability of the Chinese version of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction With Assistive Technology for people with spinal cord injury. Assist Technol 2006; 18: 25-33.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16796239

Chan SC, Chan AP. User satisfaction, community participation and quality of life among Chinese wheelchair users with spinal cord injury: a preliminary study. Occup Ther Int. 2007;14(3):123-43.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17624872

Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. The Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0): An overview and recent progress. Technology and Disability 2002;14:101-105.
http://iospress.metapress.com/content/b23egtty2mph84b0/

Hwang WJ, Hwang S, Chung Y. Test-retest reliability of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology 2.0-Korean version for individuals with spinal cord injury. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27(5):1291-3.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26157203

Mao HF, Chen WY, Yao G, Huang SL, Lin CC, Huang WN. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0): the development of the Taiwanese version. Clin Rehabil. 2010;24(5):412-21.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20442253