AT OUTCOMES USING AN MPT PROCESS: The assessment of AT outcomes is of interest to multiple groups of stakeholders from user, to their caregivers, service providers and policy makers. As stated in the book (Zapf 2023): The MPT and MATCH Assessment Processes, as evidence-based process standards and educational frameworks for improved in- terdisciplinary service delivery, have been shown through over 30 years of academic and gray literature, conferences, and books to support the capacity building necessary to assure meaningful out- comes for the provision of AT. The use of the MPT repeatedly result in a good solution and outcome for the technology user and, in many cases, directed a modified process. Such outcomes, as the ultimate measure of value, can only be achieved when person- focused assessments are a critical compo- nent of the service delivery process. The MPT process and assess- ments will be used when both provider and user gain from its use and achieve a true win-win outcome such as engagement in the process, the avoidance of mistakes, and frustration arising from failed results (Sax et al., 2023, pp 215-216). CLOSING COMMENTS: The MPT family is a group of dedicated professionals in as- sistive technology around the globe with a mission to provide effective consumer-based assessments to individuals with dis- abilities to help them achieve their goals and dreams. The MPT and MATCH-ACES assessment process is a valuable tool that can guide you in an effective consumer-focused assessment process that benefits the potential AT user and team. The Evi- dence-Based Assessment for Assistive Technology: The MPT and MATCH-ACES Assessments is a resource that provides the reader with a foundation of the framework and examples of use from child to adult, with a national and international focus. Dr. Scher- er and I invite you to our MPT family!!’ REFERENCES: Craddock, G. 2002. Partnership and assistive technology in Ireland. In M.J. Scherer (Ed.), Assistive technology: Matching device and consumer for successful rehabilitation , pp. 253–266. Washing- ton, DC: APA Books. Federici, S., & Scherer, M.J. (Eds.). 2018. Assistive technology as- sessment handbook (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https:// doi.org/10.1201/9781351228411. Federici, S., Scherer, M.J., & Ehrlich-Jones, L. 2021. Measure- ment characteristics and clinical utility of the assistive technolo- gy device predisposition assessment (ATD PA) among mixed pa- tient populations. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 102 (4), 805–806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2020.11.007
the use of technology. In Zapf, S. (ed.). Evidence-based assess- ment framework for assistive technology: MPT and MATCH-ACES assessments. Pp. 215-216. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Scherer, M.J. 2002. MPT: Matching persons and technology. Strumento per la valutazione della predisposizione individuale all’uso di ausili tecnologici. Milan: Fondazione don Carlo Gnocchi. Scherer, M.J. (1997). Matching assistive technology & child (MATCH) for early Intervention. Webster, NY: The Institute for Matching Person & Technol- ogy, Inc. Scherer, M.J. (1998). Matching person and technology (MPT) model manual and accompanying assessments (Third Edition Ed.). Webster, NY: Institute for Matching Person and Technology, Inc. Scherer, M.J., & Craddock, G. (2002). Matching person & tech- nology (MPT) assessment process. Technology and Disability, 14(3), 125-131. Scherer, M.J., & Cushman, L.A. (2000). Predicting satisfaction with assistive technology for a sample of adults with new spinal cord injuries. Psychological Reports, 87(3 Pt 1), 981–987. https:// doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2000.87.3.981 Scherer, M.J., Sax, C., Vanbiervliet, A., Cushman, L.A., & Scher- er, J.V. (2005) Predictors of assistive technology use: The impor- tance of personal and psychosocial factors, Disability and Reha- bilitation ,27:21, 1321-1331, DOI: 10.1080/09638280500164800 World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). 2022. Global report on assistive tech- nology . Geneva: License: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO Zabala, J. (2005). Ready, SETT, go! Getting started with the SETT framework. Closing the Gap: Computer Technology in Special Education and Rehabilitation , 23(6), 1-3. Zabala, J., Scherer, M., Reed, P., McClosky, S., Lahm, L., Korsten, J., Holland, R. & Case, D. (2004, January 14). Alliance for Tech- nology Access (ATA) and CEC Technology and Media (TAM) Joint Pre-Conference Full Day Session: Finding the Right Fit!: Assistive Technology Evaluation by Design. ATIA 2004 Conference and Ex- hibition, January 14-17, 2004, Lake Buena Vista, Florida. Zapf ,S.A., Scherer, M.J., Baxter, M.F., & Rintala, D.H. (2016). Validating a measure to assess factors that affect assistive tech- nology use by students with disabilities in elementary and sec- ondary education. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technol- ogy,11 (1), 38-49.
Sax, C, Layton, N., Elsaesser. L., Scherer, M. (2023). Assessing MPT outcomes and the person’s realization of the benefit from
10
www.closingthegap.com/membership | December, 2023 / January, 2024 Closing The Gap © 2024 Closing The Gap, Inc. All rights reserved.
BACK TO CONTENTS
Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator