Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
18
New Rehabilitation Opportunities
the Use of
Microswitch Technology
G. E. Lancioni, N. N. Singh, M. F. O'Reilly, J. Sigafoos, D. Oliva, and G. Basili
CONTENTS
18.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 399
18.2 Experimental Microswitches for Small (Nontypical) Responses ............................. 402
18.3 Combinations of Microswitches .................................................................................... 405
18.4 Combinations of Microswitches and VOCAs .............................................................. 407
18.5 Discussion ......................................................................................................................... 410
18.5.1 Outcome of the Studies ..................................................................................... 410
18.5.2 Implications of the Studies and Practical Perspectives ................................ 411
18.5.3 Other Relevant Procedural Aspects for Daily Programs ............................. 413
18.6 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 414
Summary of the Chapter ............................................................................................................ 414
References ..................................................................................................................................... 415
18.1 Introduction
Persons with profound and multiple disabilities, regardless of whether their disabilities are
congenital or acquired, are often unable to interact with their immediate environment and
control relevant stimuli because of their limited response skills (Lancioni et al. 2001a, 2001b,
2007b, 2007c; Mechling 2006). This lack of interaction (of response skills) has far-reaching
social and practical implications. In fact, it emphasizes a condition of withdrawal and weak-
ness, reduces the persons' opportunities of an active, constructive role within the environ-
ment, limits their overall perspectives of development or recovery, impoverishes their social
appearance, and negatively affects their quality of life (Lancioni et al. 2001c, 2001d, 2008a,
2008b; Schalock et al. 2003; Lachapelle et al. 2005; Petry et al. 2009; McDougall et al. 2010).
Intervention procedures that are based on environmental enrichment and stimulation
handled by staff and families are the most common forms of approach with these persons.
These forms of approach are functional to improve the persons' input level and might also
reduce problem behaviors that may be present in their repertoire (e.g., Ringdahl et al. 1997;
Matson et al. 2006; Richman 2008). Despite these positive aspects, they also seem to have two
correlated drawbacks. First, enrichment/stimulation conditions could easily make the indi-
viduals recipients of external input rather than active agents who pursue the input on their
own initiative (i.e., purposefully). Second, those conditions would not support and motivate
399
