↓ Skip to main content

Perspectives of basic wheelchair users on improving their access to wheelchair services in Kenya and Philippines: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perspectives of basic wheelchair users on improving their access to wheelchair services in Kenya and Philippines: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12914-017-0130-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emma Williams, Elizabeth Hurwitz, Immaculate Obaga, Brenda Onguti, Adovich Rivera, Tyrone Reden L. Sy, R. Lee Kirby, Jamie Noon, Deepti Tanuku, Anthony Gichangi, Eva Bazant

Abstract

The United Nations has called for countries to improve access to mobility devices when needed. The World Health Organization has published guidelines on the provision of manual wheelchairs in less-resourced settings. Yet little is known about the extent to which appropriate wheelchairs are available and provided according to international guidelines. This study's purpose was to describe wheelchair users' experiences receiving services and acquiring wheelchair skills in urban and peri-urban areas of Kenya and the Philippines. Local researchers in Nairobi and Manila interviewed 48 adult basic wheelchair users, with even distribution of those who had and had not received wheelchair services along with their wheelchair. Recordings were transcribed in the local language and translated into English. The study team coded transcripts for predetermined and emergent themes, using Atlas-ti software. A qualitative content analysis approach was taken with the WHO service delivery process as an organizing framework. Wheelchair users frequently described past experiences with ill-fitting wheelchairs and little formal training to use wheelchairs effectively. Through exposure to multiple wheelchairs and self-advocacy, they learned to select wheelchairs suitable for their needs. Maintenance and repair services were often in short supply. Participants attributed shorter duration of wheelchair use to lack of repair. Peer support networks emerged as an important source of knowledge, resources and emotional support. Most participants acknowledged that they received wheelchairs that would have been difficult or impossible for them to pay for, and despite challenges, they were grateful to have some means of mobility. Four themes emerged as critical for understanding the implementation of wheelchair services: barriers in the physical environment, the need for having multiple chairs to improve access, perceived social stigma, and the importance of peer support. Interventions are needed to provide wheelchairs services efficiently, at scale, in an environment facilitating physical access and peer support, and reduced social stigma. Not applicable since this was a descriptive study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 148 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 15%
Researcher 11 7%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 47 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 19 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 11%
Engineering 13 9%
Social Sciences 8 5%
Psychology 7 5%
Other 28 19%
Unknown 57 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 June 2023.
All research outputs
#7,151,813
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,912
of 17,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,004
of 327,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#97
of 195 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,060 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 195 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.