Jordana L. Maisel

Anthropometry and Standards for Wheeled Mobility: An International Comparison

ABSTRACT Space requirements for accommodating wheeled mobility devices and their users in the built environment are key components of standards for accessible design. These requirements typically include dimensions for clear floor areas, maneuvering clearances, seat and knee clearance heights, as well as some reference dimensions on wheeled mobility device sizes. Recent research from four countries was reviewed and compared with their prevailing accessibility standards to identify needs for improving standards. Findings from ongoing anthropometry research on wheeled mobility in the U.S. were used for evaluating the adequacy of existing U.S. accessibility standards. Preliminary analysis suggests that the U.S. standards, which are based on research conducted in the 1970s, need to be updated to address advances in wheeled mobility technology and changes in user demographics. The analysis highlights the importance of integrating research with standards development, organizing international collaborations, and developing international standards.

Toward inclusive housing and neighborhood design: A look at visitability

As the population ages and faces a greater number of physical disabilities, housing and community design must be re‐examined. This research explores the growing need for accessible housing in the United States and the recent emergence of visitability as an affordable and sustainable design strategy aimed at increasing the number of accessible single family homes and neighborhoods. Both a qualitative and quantitative methods approach was utilized to study the evolution of accessible housing policy in the United States, the history and fundamental principles of visitability, and the number and diversity of visitability initiatives and programs. The research explores trends in the visitability movement, as well as the challenges and controversies currently surrounding the visitability movement and potentially threatening its future success.

How a diverse research ecosystem has generated new rehabilitation technologies: Review of NIDILRR's Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program.