Background People with intellectual disability and blindness tend to be withdrawn and sedentary and fail to engage in activity.Objective This study assessed a technology system to support five of these people in gathering boxes with objects from a storage room and bringing them to different destination rooms.Methods The technology system involved barcodes, barcode readers, a smartphone, and mini speakers. At the start of a session, the system provided the participants with instructions to take a box from the storage room. Fifteen boxes marked with specific barcodes were available. The system (a) identified the box taken through barcode readers, (b) provided instructions (spatial cues) to guide the participants to the right destination room, and finally (c) delivered preferred stimulation. The same process was repeated for the following boxes.Results During baseline sessions without the system, the mean frequency of boxes managed successfully (collected, transported, and deposited independently) was zero or virtually zero. During the intervention sessions with the system, the participants' mean frequency of boxes managed successfully increased to between nearly 12.5 and over 14 per session.Conclusions These findings suggest that the technology system might be a valid support for people like the participants of this study.

BackgroundPeople with severe to profound intellectual disability and visual or visual and motor impairments often experience passivity and isolation. This can lead to limited environmental stimulation, reduced physical activity, and the acquisition of incorrect body postures. Approaches to improve the situation have generally involved increasing environmental stimulation, which was regulated by the context or controlled by the people through adaptive responding and assistive technology. ObjectiveThis study assessed 2 intervention programs serving as extensions and advancements of previous approaches aimed at helping participants with intellectual and multiple disabilities control environmental stimulation through their own responses and assistive technology. The first program was designed to help 4 participants with severe intellectual disability and blindness alternate between periods of preferred music stimulation and mild physical activity. The second program was designed to help 5 participants with severe to profound intellectual disability, visual and motor impairments, and postural problems (ie, a tendency to tilt their torso and head forward). These participants were led to access preferred environmental stimulation, engage in mild physical activity, and increase correct posture. MethodsEach of the 2 programs was implemented according to a single-case research design. The technology for the first program involved (1) a smartphone with the MacroDroid app, which regulated the intervention conditions; (2) pressure sensors that allowed the participants to activate music stimulation; (3) a proximity sensor that monitored the participants’ physical activity responses (ie, placing objects in a container high up in front of them); and (4) a mini speaker. The same technology was also used for the second program. In this program, the participants’ physical activity responses consisted of arm-stretching movements, and the smartphone also served for monitoring the participants’ correct posture. Within each program, a session included 7 music periods and 6 activity periods. ResultsDuring programs 1 and 2, the mean percentage of music pieces activated independently of research assistants’ guidance was between 94.7% and 99.4%. The mean percentage of objects placed in the carton and of shelf-touching responses performed independently was between 98.7% and 99.7%. The baseline mean percentages were between 0% and 24.5%. The mean percentage of session time in a correct posture (program 2) increased to 71.1%-89.6% from baseline values of 18.8%-36.5%. A total of 8 of the 9 participants involved in the 2 programs showed higher levels of indices of happiness during program sessions than control sessions. ConclusionsThe results suggest that the programs might be a useful resource for supporting people with severe to profound intellectual disability and visual or visual and motor impairments.

While touch screen technology is largely available, people with intellectual and developmental disabilities might have difficulties using it due to erratic touch responses. This study included six adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities who were managing touch screen technology modified via an input adaptation module. Such a module allowed them to activate the screen and access leisure events and complete match-to-sample tasks with various response configurations (e.g., precise clicks, heavy/prolonged touch, and taps). The first question of the study was whether successful history with the modified technology would facilitate the participants’ use of standard touch screen technology. A second (subordinate) question was whether practice with standard touch screen technology would improve their use of it. To address these questions, the participants were presented with series of sessions with standard technology in alternation with series of sessions with the modified technology. The results showed that the participants were highly successful with the modified technology and partially (or minimally) successful with the standard technology. Only three of them seemed to improve their performance with the standard technology following practice. In conclusion, the modified touch screen technology was consistently effective in helping participants with intellectual and developmental disabilities who continued to have difficulties in using standard touch screen technology.

People with severe intellectual disability and blindness tend to perform only simple occupational activities and are mostly unable to transition between those activities. This inability makes their level of occupation independent of staff support fairly limited. Technology-aided programs may be one of the few opportunities available to increase their independent occupation. This study assessed one such program designed to (a) monitor the participants’ responses and guide them to transition to a new activity once the previous activity had been completed, (b) ensure the presentation of brief periods of preferred stimulation contingent on the participants’ responses during the activities (i.e., to increase their engagement motivation), and (c) provide verbal encouragements/prompts if the participants failed to respond within a preset time interval. Each session included a sequence of eight or nine activities (e.g., placing glasses in a glass holder box) to be carried out at eight or nine different desks. The technology included a smartphone fitted with a commercial and a dedicated application, a series of barcodes, a barcode reader, and mini speakers. The study included six participants and was carried out using single-case research methodology. During the baseline (without the system), the participants’ mean percentage of objects used (out of those available for the activities) varied between about 33 and 71. Their mean percentage of desks/activities reached independently was zero except in one case. During the intervention (with the system), the participants managed to use between about 97 and nearly 100 of the objects available for the activities and to transition between the activities independently (i.e., with the mean percentage of desks/activities reached independently varying from about 98 to nearly 100). These findings seem to be encouraging as to the possibility of helping people with severe intellectual disability and blindness manage constructive occupation. Caution may, however, be required in drawing conclusions given the limitations of the study (e.g., a relatively small number of participants and lack of maintenance and generalization data).

Recent work with people with blindness and intellectual disability assessed a technology-aided program intended to help eight participants travel indoor routes to reach relevant destinations. The technology included a smartphone, two barcode readers worn by the participants at their ankles, barcodes displayed at specific points of the travel routes, and a mini speaker. The technology ensured that participants received verbal instructions on how to proceed (e.g., take a left turn, cross from one side to the other of a corridor, or go straight ahead and follow the handrail) when their barcode readers detected the barcodes along the routes. The present study was an extension of the aforementioned work with the same eight participants. It was aimed at enabling the participants to (a) anticipate and bypass obstacles available on the routes in relation to verbal warnings and (b) maintain the ability to travel the routes correctly with the help of verbal instructions. In practice, the study (a) added a second module to the technology system used in previous work (i.e., a module consisting of a smartphone fitted with a special application that informed the participants about obstacles on the routes), (b) assessed the suitability and impact of such module in helping the participants anticipate and bypass obstacles, and (c) monitored the participants’ ability to travel the routes correctly (i.e., the ability that they had acquired previously) by continuing to use the same technology-regulated instructions. The results showed that introducing the second technology module enabled all participants to anticipate and bypass obstacles encountered along the routes. The participants also maintained their ability to travel the routes and reach the target destinations. Based on these results, it might be argued that combining the previously developed technology system with the technology module added in this study can be an effective strategy for helping people with blindness and intellectual disability travel indoor routes in a relatively accurate and safe manner.

People with severe-to-profound intellectual disability and blindness tend to be sedentary and detached, given their orientation and mobility problems, often combined with their limited interest in their surroundings. An approach to address this problem may involve the use of technology systems guiding the participants through mobility and occupational activity (object use) with a combination of spatial/orientation cues, basic instructions for the responses required by the activity, and positive stimulation during the activity. This study extended the above-mentioned approach using a new technology system that entailed a barcode reader, a series of barcodes, a smartphone, mini speakers, and a special application controlling the presentation of orientation cues and response instructions. Six participants were involved in the study. They were (a) guided (through orientation cues and instructions) to take objects from three different desks in a large room and deposit those objects into the carton of a fourth desk available in the same room, and (b) provided with a brief period of preferred stimulation for each object deposited in the carton. The results showed that the participants were generally unable to collect, transport, and deposit objects during the baseline phase (i.e., when the technology system was unavailable). During the intervention phase (with the support of the technology system), they managed to collect, transport, and deposit a mean of about 10 to 18 objects per session. Sessions lasted about 25 minutes. These results suggest that the technology system might be a valuable resource to help people with severe-to-profound intellectual disabilities and blindness manage mobility and occupational activity.

(1) Background: People with intellectual disabilities and blindness tend to be withdrawn and sedentary. This study was carried out to assess a new technology system to enable seven of these people to collect boxes containing different sets of objects from a storage room and transport them to the appropriate destination rooms. (2) Methods: The technology system used for the study involved tags with radio frequency identification codes, a tag reader, a smartphone, and mini speakers. At the start of a session, the participants were called by the system to take a box from the storage room. Once they collected a box, the system identified the tags attached to the box, called the participants to the room where the box was to be transported and delivered, and provided them with preferred music stimulation. The same process was followed for each of the other boxes available in the session. (3) Results: During baseline sessions without the system, the mean frequency of boxes handled correctly (collected, transported, and put away without research assistants’ guidance) was zero or virtually zero. During the intervention sessions with the system, the participants’ mean frequency of boxes handled correctly increased to between about 10 and 15 per session. (4) Conclusions: These findings suggest that the new technology system might be helpful for people like the participants of this study.

BackgroundPeople with severe-to-profound intellectual disability and sensory-motor impairment tend to be passive and detached from their immediate context. ObjectiveThis study assessed a new technology system using a webcam to detect participants’ responses (ie, hand contact with objects) and to trigger computer delivery of preferred environmental stimulation, such as music, contingent on (immediately after) the occurrence of those responses. MethodsIn total, 8 adults with severe to profound intellectual disability and extensive motor and visual impairments participated in the study. Each participant was exposed to an ABACB design. The technology system did not provide stimulation during the A (baseline) phases, provided stimulation contingent on the responses during the B (intervention) phases, and provided stimulation throughout the sessions during the C (control) phase. Sessions lasted 5 minutes. ResultsDuring the first baseline phase, the participants’ mean frequency of responses per session was between about 3 and 6.5. During the first intervention phase, it increased to between about 10 and 18. It showed a clear decline during the second baseline phase, remained low during the control phase, and increased again during the second intervention phase. During this phase, it ranged from about 13 to 19.5. ConclusionsThe new technology system might be a useful tool to help people with intellectual and sensory-motor disabilities increase object contact and stimulation control.

BackgroundPeople with moderate to severe intellectual disability can have difficulties accessing leisure stimuli and engaging in basic cognitive and physical activity independently. These difficulties may be even more marked in individuals with a combination of intellectual disability and sensory or sensory-motor impairments. ObjectiveThis study assessed a new program relying on touch screen technology, which was set up to support access to leisure stimuli and the performance of a simple form of cognitive activity and basic physical exercise for adults with intellectual or intellectual and hearing disabilities, lack of functional speech, and poor motor dexterity. MethodsThe program alternated access to preferred stimuli (ie, songs, comic sketches, or cartoons) with cognitive activity (ie, matching-to-sample tasks) and physical exercise (ie, body movements). The touch screen technology was modified to ensure that people with poor motor dexterity would be effective in their responding regardless of the accuracy of their responses. The program was implemented with 7 participants. Its impact was assessed through the use of single-case research methodology. ResultsDuring the baseline (when standard technology was used), the mean percentage of songs, comic sketches, or cartoons accessed; match-to-sample responses provided; and body movements performed correctly and independent of research assistants’ help was 0% for all participants with a single exception. During the intervention (when the new program with modified touch screen technology was used), the participants’ mean percentage of songs, comic sketches, or cartoons accessed correctly and independent of research assistants’ help per session was virtually 100%. Their mean percentage for correct match-to-sample responses provided and correct body movements performed independent of research assistants’ help was within the 90% to 100% range. ConclusionsThe findings suggest that the program may constitute a useful tool for helping people with intellectual and multiple disabilities access leisure stimuli and engage in cognitive and physical activity.