Examines consumers’ subjective satisfaction with achievements in a variety of functional areas. Consumers are asked to characterize aspects of functioning, temperament, lifestyle, and views of a particular assistive device.
- The ATD-PA encourages user participation in the process of developing and setting goals and helps the consumer to better understand her or his own needs and interests. The ATD-PA is useful when a person has a complicated case and is a good tool for assessing a client’s ‘story’ with assistive technology.
- Together with functional data, the ATD-PA has the potential to contribute to the formulation of consumer-directed needs and goals for rehabilitation. For persons with new spinal cord injury who indicate a poor history with assistive technology use, the ATD-PA can be a measure to identify obstacles to AT use early on in the course of rehabilitation.
- The ATD-PA has been shown to be a reliable measure and to have adequate content and criterion-related validity in the SCI population.
- Person-reported but can be applied through interview techniques.
- Domain one contains 53 items. It is designed to be administered per individual across several time points. It is divided into four sections. Section A (items 1-9) asks respondents to rate their current capabilities in nine functional areas according to a five-point scale (1 = poor to 5 = excellent). All items in Sections B and C comprise the QOL subset. Each item is rated on a five-point scale (Section B: 1 = not satisfied; 5 = very satisfied; Section C: 1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). Section D contains 33 statements about temperament and psychosocial support. Patients check those which apply to them.
- Domain two is designed to be administered for each assistive technology device used across several time points. It consists of 10 items related to the expected benefit from a device. Patients rate each item on a five-point scale based on how much the statement applies to them (1 = does not apply to me; 5 = definitely applies to me).
- In some spinal cord injury research publications, only domain two is used.
Number of Items
63 (divided into 2 domains)
The person’s assistive device(s).
No additional information is provided on scoring.
Brazilian Portuguese, French, German, Greek, Italian, Hungarian, Korean and Spanish (Spain).
Training manual available.
Can be purchased here.
# of studies reporting psychometric properties: 1
- Scores from the quality of life section provide information regarding the consumer’s subjective quality of life.
- Higher scores are indicative of better quality of life.
- No meaningful cut-points or normative data have been established for the SCI population.
- Published data is available for comparison for ATD-PA B & C for the SCI population (see the Interpretability section of the Study Details sheet).
MCID: not established for SCI
SEM: not established for SCI
MDC: not established for SCI
Mean Scores (Person Domain Sections B & C only): 1.75-4.10
(Scherer & Cushman 2001: n = 20, 10 males, mixed injury types, acute SCI)
Internal consistency of the ATD-PA was reported to be High (Cronbach’s α = 0.80).
(Scherer & Cushman 2001)
Correlation of the ATD-PA Quality of Life subscale was High with:
- The Brief Symptom Inventory (Spearman’s ρ = -0.71)
- The Satisfaction with Life Scale (Spearman’s ρ = 0.89)
(Scherer & Cushman 2001)
No values were reported for responsiveness of the ATD-PA for the SCI population.
No values were reported for the presence of floor/ceiling effects in the ATD-PA for the SCI population.
Dr. Ben Mortenson, Kyle Diab, Matthew Querée, Gita Manhas
Date Last Updated
20 July 2020
Koumpouros Y, Papageorgiou E, Karavasili A, AlexopoulouD. Translation and validation of the assistive technology device predisposition assessment in Greek in order to assess satisfaction with use of the selected assistive device. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2017;12:535-542.
Scherer MJ and Cushman LA. Measuring subjective quality of life for spinal cord injury: a validation study of the assistive technology device predisposition assessment. Disability and Rehabilitation, 2001; 23(9): 387-393.
Scherer MJ and Cushman LA. Determining the content for an interactive training programme and interpretive guidelines for the Assistive Technology Device Predisposition Assessment. Disability and Rehabilitation 2002; 24: 126-130.