ABSTRACT
International Standards Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 5.2.3 Voluntary vs. Regulatory Industry Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
5.3 Organization of National and International Industry Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 5.3.1 Brief Description of the Standards Development Process . . . . . . . . . . 82 5.3.2 Anatomy of a Typical ISO Industry Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 5.3.3 Relationship between National and International Efforts . . . . . . . . . . 90 5.3.4 Organization of Standards Development in the United States . . . . . 90 5.3.5 The User-Responsive Development Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 5.3.6 Summary of Progress over the Past Several Decades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.3.6.1 Impact Benefits for Users, Clinicians, Industry, and Healthcare-Funding Agencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.4 The Role and Contribution of Rehabilitation Engineering in Standards Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 5.4.1 The Development and Validation of Test Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 5.4.2 Development of Test-Method Instrumentation and Equipment . . . . 92 5.4.3 Organizing and Operating a Standards-Testing Facility . . . . . . . . . . . 93 5.4.4 Role and Contribution of Rehabilitation Engineering to Standards 93 5.4.5 How to Get Involved . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
5.5 Hidden Rationale for Participation in Industry Standards Development . . . 94 5.5.1 A Strange and Amazing Multidisciplinary Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 5.5.2 The Magnitude of the Goal and Potential Impact of the Final
Result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 5.5.3 Consolidation of Worldwide Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 5.5.4 Development of Collegial Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 5.5.5 Clinical/User Application of Industry Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 5.5.6 The Direct Rewards to Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Dough: “IP834_C005” — 2006/11/2 — 16:46 — PAGE 78 — #2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6.1 Standards Development in Other Areas of Assistive Technology . 96 5.6.2 Sustaining Research and Development Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 5.6.3 Resolving Barriers to Clinical and User Application of Standards 97
5.7 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 5.8 Study Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Upon completion of this chapter, the reader will be able to:
Have an understanding of the history of assistive technology (AT) standards Know the current status of several AT standards Understand the practical application of AT standards Understand how AT standards are developed Have an understanding of the engineering contributions to AT standards Have some knowledge of future needs for AT standards
Products for persons with disabilities, especially those on which users rely to carry out their daily activities, assume a high level of expectation in terms of design, technical performance, cost-benefit, reliability, and safety. Prior to 1980, there was no systematic way for wheelchair users, product prescribers, or healthcare insurers to determine, in advance of purchase, what products actually met these higher needs and expectations. Reports of poor reliability, user injury, and sometimes fatalities were documented. Large bulk purchasers, such as the Department of Veterans Affairs in the United States and national healthcare providers in Europe were also in need of objective information that would guide their decisions related to choice of products for inclusion on their provider listings of approved products for government payment.
