功能障碍人群辅助器具适配度评价及影响因素分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2025.11.012

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的了解我国功能障碍人群辅助器具适配度现状，识别未满足的辅具需求及影响辅助器具使用态度的关键因素。

方法基于全球辅助技术快速筛查项目中国区调查数据，选取北京、安徽、福建、湖北、四川和陕西的5 935例功能障碍者作为研究对象，分析辅助器具适配情况，结合技术接受模型建立理论分析框架，并采用多元线性回归分析辅助器具使用态度的影响因素。

结果功能障碍人群的康复辅助器具使用率为65.9%，且存在多重功能障碍现象。视力障碍人群适配度高(68.44%)，沟通障碍人群适配度最低(1.52%)；农村地区、老年人的适配度较低。辅助器具满意度水平整体较高(4.11±0.71)。家庭环境无障碍水平(B = 0.396, P < 0.001)、公共环境无障碍水平(B = 0.204, P < 0.001)、辅助器具功能效用性(B = 0.204, P < 0.001)和获取距离(B < -0.112, P < 0.01)是影响辅助器具使用满意度的关键因素，而支付主体的影响并不显著(P > 0.05)。

结论我国功能障碍人群的辅助器具适配存在显著的结构性失衡和群体差异，对多重功能障碍现象的关注不足，非适配群体仍有大量未满足的辅具需求；辅具使用的整体满意度较高，但影响因素复杂。应持续完善无障碍环境建设，推动个性化适配服务，并优化辅助器具服务网络，以提升辅助器具的适配精准度和使用持续性，促进功能障碍人群的主观福祉。

关键词: 功能障碍, 辅助器具, 适配度, 技术接受模型, 影响因素

Abstract:

Objective To investigate the current status of assistive device adaptation among people with dysfunction in China, identify unmet assistive needs for assistive products, and determine key factors influencing attitudes toward assistive device use.

Methods Based on data from the Chinese segment of the Global Rapid Assistive Technology Assessment (rATA) survey, 5 935 individuals with dysfunction from Beijing, Anhui, Fujian, Hubei, Sichuan and Shaanxi were included. The adaptation status of assistive devices was analyzed, and a theoretical framework was constructed using the technology acceptance model. Multiple linear regression analysis was applied to identify factors influencing attitudes toward assistive device use.

Results The utilization rate of rehabilitation assistive devices among people with dysfunction was 65.9%, with a notable prevalence of multiple functional impairments. Fit rate was the highest (68.44%) in individuals with visual impairments, while those with communication impairments had the lowest (1.52%). Fit rates were significantly lower among rural residents and older adults. Overall satisfaction with assistive devices was relatively high (4.11±0.71). Accessibility of the home environment (B = 0.396, P < 0.001), accessibility of the public environment (B = 0.204, P < 0.001), functional utility of assistive devices (B = 0.204, P < 0.001), and distance to obtain the devices (B < -0.112, P < 0.01) were key factors affecting satisfication toward assistive device use, while the source of payment showed no significant impact (P > 0.05).

Conclusion Significant structural imbalances and group disparities exist in the adaptation of assistive devices among people with dysfunction in China. The phenomenon of multiple functional impairments has not received sufficient attention, and there remains a substantial unmet need for assistive products among non-fitted groups. Although overall satisfaction with assistive devices is high, influencing factors are complex. Continuous improvement of accessibility in both private and public environments, promotion of personalized adaptation services, and optimization of assistive device service networks are essential to enhance adaptation accuracy, sustained use, and subjective well-being among people with dysfunction.

Key words: dysfunction, assistive devices, adaptation level, technology acceptance model, influencing factors

中图分类号:

R496

刘晨, 董理权, 闫媚, 江华. 功能障碍人群辅助器具适配度评价及影响因素分析[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2025, 31(11): 1354-1364.

LIU Chen, DONG Liquan, YAN Mei, JIANG Hua. Evaluation of assistive device adaptation and analysis of influencing factors among people with dysfunction[J]. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice, 2025, 31(11): 1354-1364.

图/表 7

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

表7

参考文献 42

[1]	United Nations. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)[EB/OL]. (2021-05-03) [2025-06-10]. https://sdgs.un.org/goals.
[2]	TEBBUTT E, BRODMANN R, BORG J, et al. Assistive products and the sustainable development goals (SDGs)[J]. Glob Health, 2016, 12: 79. doi: 10.1186/s12992-016-0220-6
[3]	World Health Organization. Priority assistive products list[R]. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2016.
[4]	JIMÉNEZ-ARBERAS E, DÍEZ E. Psychosocial impact of assistive devices and other technologies on deaf and hard of hearing people[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2021, 18(14): 7259. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18147259
[5]	GIESBRECHT E M, SMITH E M, MORTENSON W B, et al. Needs for mobility devices, home modifications and personal assistance among Canadians with disabilities[J]. Health Rep, 2017, 28(8): 9-15. pmid: 29044443
[6]	ITOH S, MIWA H, WU V X, et al. Acceptance of care technologies to support activities of daily living by middle-aged and older adults in Japan: a cross-sectional study[J]. Int J Nurs Stud Adv, 2021, 3: 100042.
[7]	World Health Organization, United Nations Children's Fund. Global report on assistive technology[R]. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2022.
[8]	DE WITTE L, VAN DER VAART R. Inequities in access to assistive technology: a call for action[J]. Lancet Pub Health, 2025, 10(1): e4-e5.
[9]	董理权, 李晞, 徐进, 等. "互联网+"智能化辅助器具评估与适配服务体系构建研究[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2019, 25(6): 724-728. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.06.019
	DONG L Q, LI X, XU J, et al. Construction of assistive products service system using internet plus and artificial intelligence[J]. Chin J Rehabil Theory Pract, 2019, 25(6): 724-728.
[10]	JIANG H, LIU C, WU X, et al. The development of assistive product policies in China from the perspective of the assistive product industry[J]. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol, 2023, 18(8): 1266-1280. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2022.2143582
[11]	张小雪, 陶静, 张腾宇. 我国康复辅助器具配置服务信息化的现状和发展[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2024, 39(10): 1542-1547.
[12]	YU S, LUO D, ZHU Y, et al. Factors influencing utilisation of assistive devices by the elderly in China: a community-based cross-sectional study[J]. Public Health, 2022, 213: 12-18. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2022.09.002 pmid: 36332412
[13]	CHEN P, WANG B, HU Z, et al. The demand for assistive technology, services, and satisfaction self-reports among people with disabilities in China[J]. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol, 2025, 20(5): 1199-1208. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2024.2442711
[14]	毛艾琳, 江华, 董理权, 等. 我国老年人辅助器具需求及满意度调查分析[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2024, 39(10): 1491-1494, 1506.
[15]	饶千宜, 王俊, 白定群, 等. 医养结合机构老年人辅助器具使用现状及影响因素分析[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2024, 39(2): 232-237.
[16]	余诗畦, 朱莹, 杨力凝, 等. 重庆市社区老年人康复辅具使用与需求现状调查[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2024, 39(12): 1870-1873.
[17]	郝晓宁, 许金鹏, 郑研辉. 残疾老人辅助器具支付意愿的影响机制分析:基于Logit-ISM模型[J]. 卫生经济研究, 2022, 39(12): 17-21, 25.
	HAO X N, XU J P, ZHENG Y H. Analysis of the mechanisms influencing the willingness to pay for assistive devices for the elderly with disabilities: based on Logit-ISM model[J]. Health Econ Res, 2022, 39(12): 17-21, 25.
[18]	陈盼盼, 王炳龙, 董理权, 等. 成都肢体残疾人未满足辅助技术需求及其相关因素[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2024, 30(5): 598-605. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2024.05.015
	CHEN P P, WANG B L, DONG L Q, et al. Unmet needs for assistive technology and its related factors for persons with physical disabilities in Chengdu, China[J]. Chin J Rehabil Theory Pract, 2024, 30(5): 598-605.
[19]	MAO A, JIANG H, DONG L, et al. Assistive products for older adults in China: self-reported need, services, and satisfaction[J]. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol, 2024, 19(8): 3006-3014. doi: 10.1080/17483107.2024.2338134
[20]	王妍, 矫非桐. 老年康复辅助器具使用及弃用的因素调查分析[J]. 吉林医药学院学报, 2021, 42(1): 30-31.
[21]	ZHANG W, EIDE A H, PRYOR W, et al. Measuring self-reported access to assistive technology using the WHO rapid assistive technology assessment (rATA) questionnaire: protocol for a multi-country study[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2021, 18(24): 13336. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182413336
[22]	World Health Organization. Measuring access to assistive technology in countries. World Health Organization[EB/OL]. (2022-05-15) [2025-10-21]. https://www.who.int/tools/ata-toolkit/rata#:-:text=Measuring%20access%20to%20assistive%20technology%20in%20countries%20The,user%20satisfaction%2C%20and%20barriers%20to%20accessing%20assistive%20technology.
[23]	DAVIS F D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology[J]. MIS Q, 1989, 13(3): 319-340. doi: 10.2307/249008
[24]	SHIN H R, UM S R, YOON H J, et al. Comprehensive senior technology acceptance model of daily living assistive technology for older adults with frailty: cross-sectional study[J]. J Med Internet Res, 2023, 25: e41935. doi: 10.2196/41935
[25]	周川力, 肖育才, 寇璇. 公共服务满意度对纳税遵从意愿的影响: 基于良性互动的税收征纳关系视角[J]. 西南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2024, 45(12): 117-129.
	ZHOU C L, XIAO Y C, KOU X. The impact of public service satisfaction on tax compliance willingness: based on the perspective of benign interaction in tax collection and administration relationships[J]. J Southwest Minzu Univ (Humanit Soc Sci), 2024, 45(12): 117-129.
[26]	郑浩生. 公众参与与农村居民公共服务质量评价[J]. 华南农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2024, 23(1): 25-34.
	ZHENG H S. Public participation and rural residents' public service quality evaluation[J]. J South China Agric Univ (Soc Sci Ed), 2024, 23(1): 25-34.
[27]	闫媚, 江华, 董理权, 等. 中国辅助技术的需求、供给和满意度研究: 基于快速辅助技术评估数据[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2023, 29(4): 373-380. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2023.04.001
	YAN M, JIANG H, DONG L Q, et al. Demand, supply and satisfaction of assistive technology in China based on rapid assistive technology assessment data[J]. Chin J Rehabil Theory Pract, 2023, 29(4): 373-380.
[28]	BORG J, MULLER S, EIDE A H, et al. Need equality and access equity to assistive products across genders and locations in 29 countries: a cross-sectional study[J]. Front Public Health, 2025, 13: 1581048. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1581048
[29]	BIGONNESSE C, MAHMOOD A, CHAUDHURY H, et al. The role of neighborhood physical environment on mobility and social participation among people using mobility assistive technology[J]. Disabil Soc, 2018, 33(6): 866-893. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2018.1453783
[30]	杨立雄, 李晞, 董理权, 等. 全国辅助器具服务网络建设研究[J]. 残疾人研究, 2020, (1): 61-71.
	YANG L X, LI X, DONG L Q, et al. Research on the construction of national assistive technology service network[J]. Disabil Res, 2020, (1): 61-71.
[31]	吴世彩, 孟丽君. 运动功能障碍人群健康视域下的伦理关怀研究[J]. 伦理学研究, 2023, (4): 103-110.
[32]	ROOKS-ELLIS D L, RYAN J, FLOYD K, et al. Assistive technology and rural settings: a scoping review of the literature[J]. J Spec Educ Technol, 2025, 40(2): 138-151. doi: 10.1177/01626434241289955
[33]	高嘉敏, 郑晓瑛. 中国听力残疾老年人辅助器具使用现状及其影响因素分析[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2021, 37(8): 1261-1266.
	GAO J M, ZHENG X Y. Use of hearing aids and assistive listening devices and its influencing factors among the elderly with disabling hearing loss in China[J]. Chin J Public Health, 2021, 37(8): 1261-1266.
[34]	GARÇON L, KHASNABIS C, WALKER L, et al. Medical and assistive health technology: meeting the needs of aging populations[J]. Gerontologist, 2016, 56(Suppl 2): S293-S302. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnw005
[35]	孙祁, 胡姣, 施望喜, 等. 面向失能老人的康复辅助器具适配现状及需求分析: 以湖北省为例[C]. 成都: 生命关怀与智慧康养系列学术研讨会, 2024.
[36]	PANDA S, KAUR N. Leaving no one behind: achieving the sustainable development goals through accessibility for people with disabilities[J]. Int J Educ Commun Technol, 2024, 4(1): 16-26.
[37]	邱服冰, 杨亚茹. 深圳市公共体育场馆无障碍设施建设与辅助技术应用[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2023, 29(12): 1465-1472. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2023.12.011
	QIU F B, YANG Y R. Accessible facilities construction and assistive technology application of public sports venues in Shenzhen, Guangdong, China[J]. Chin J Rehabil Theory Pract, 2023, 29(12): 1465-1472.
[38]	WIDEHAMMAR C, LIDSTRÖM H, HERMANSSON L. Environmental barriers to participation and facilitators for use of three types of assistive technology devices[J]. Assist Technol, 2019, 31(2): 68-76. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2017.1363828 pmid: 28783455
[39]	KABACIŃSKA K, VU K, TAM M, et al. "Functioning better is doing better": older adults' priorities for the evaluation of assistive technology[J]. Assist Technol, 2023, 35(4): 367-373. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2022.2113180
[40]	宋毓, 季敏, 毕琪, 等. 上海市辅助器具适配对残疾人生活质量的影响分析[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2015, 21(10): 1238-1240.
	SONG Y, JI M, BI Q, et al. Effect of assistive device adaption on quality of life of people with disabilities[J]. Chin J Rehabil Theory Pract, 2015, 21(10): 1238-1240.
[41]	LIU S, JUTAI J. Relationships among technology use, social engagement, resilience, and access to healthcare[J]. Interdiscip J Health Sci, 2025, 11(1): 19-43.
[42]	朱图陵. 关于辅助技术的几个理论问题[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2021, 27(9): 1017-1023. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2021.09.004
	ZHU T L. Conceptual discussion of assistive technology[J]. Chin J Rehabil Theory Pract, 2021, 27(9): 1017-1023.

类别	正在使用对应辅具		未使用对应辅具		合计/n
类别	n	%	n	%	合计/n
移动障碍	640	39.05	999	60.95	1639
视力障碍	3255	68.44	1501	31.56	4756
听力障碍	87	7.17	1127	92.83	1214
沟通障碍	8	1.52	518	98.48	526
记忆障碍	37	2.45	1475	97.55	1512
自理障碍	78	12.19	562	87.81	640

维度	适配情况	居住地		性别		年龄
维度	适配情况	城市	农村	男性	女性	< 18岁	18~60岁	> 60岁
移动障碍	正在使用对应辅具	404	236	299	341	4	78	558
	未使用对应辅具	571	428	425	574	19	191	789
	合计	975	664	724	915	23	269	1347
视力障碍	正在使用对应辅具	2505	750	1576	1679	239	1576	1440
	未使用对应辅具	664	837	638	863	77	463	961
	合计	3169	1587	2214	2542	316	2039	2401
听力障碍	正在使用对应辅具	58	29	50	37	2	16	69
	未使用对应辅具	564	563	540	587	16	176	935
	合计	622	592	590	624	18	192	1004
沟通障碍	正在使用对应辅具	8	0	5	3	1	2	5
	未使用对应辅具	224	294	253	265	29	101	388
	合计	232	294	258	268	30	103	393
记忆障碍	正在使用对应辅具	27	10	13	24	1	7	29
	未使用对应辅具	918	557	567	908	31	278	1166
	合计	945	567	580	932	32	285	1195
自理障碍	正在使用对应辅具	54	24	28	50	2	27	49
	未使用对应辅具	269	293	262	300	19	132	411
	合计	323	317	290	350	21	159	460

项目	n	辅具满意度	F值/t值	P值
移动障碍			8.110^a	< 0.001
没有困难	2026	4.14±0.71
有些困难	451	4.07±0.71
非常困难	95	3.89±0.72
完全不能	31	3.70±0.61
视力障碍			5.520^a	< 0.001
没有困难	250	3.95±0.70
有些困难	2225	4.13±0.71
非常困难	119	4.12±0.63
完全不能	9	3.70±0.73
听力障碍			6.390^a	< 0.001
没有困难	2305	4.13±0.71
有些困难	241	3.96±0.66
非常困难	44	3.87±0.71
完全不能	13	4.05±0.65
沟通障碍			3.320^a	0.019
没有困难	2484	4.12±0.70
有些困难	84	3.94±0.70
非常困难	30	3.84±0.62
完全不能	5	4.06±0.89
记忆障碍			8.447^a	< 0.001
没有困难	2219	4.14±0.71
有些困难	357	3.96±0.65
非常困难	24	3.90±0.49
完全不能	3	3.44±0.38
自理障碍			13.192^a	< 0.001
没有困难	2395	4.14±0.70
有些困难	139	3.82±0.64
非常困难	42	3.83±0.72
完全不能	27	3.83±0.62
年龄			21.700^a	< 0.001
< 18岁	185	4.30±0.64
18~60岁	1206	4.17±0.69
> 60岁	1212	4.02±0.71
性别			-0.930^b	0.353
女	1320	4.10±0.72
男	1283	4.12±0.69
户籍			-1.559^b	0.119
农村	757	4.07±0.70
城市	1846	4.12±0.70

变量	n	辅具满意度	F值	P值
辅助器具支付主体			3.350	0.003
政府	96	3.85±0.64
非政府组织/慈善机构	16	3.96±0.79
雇主/学校	1	3.00±0.00
保险	3	4.44±0.51
自付	2056	4.12±0.71
家人/朋友	420	4.15±0.70
其他	11	3.85±0.79
辅助器具获取距离			2.660	0.021
< 5 km	2014	4.14±0.71
6~25 km	431	4.03±0.64
26~50 km	50	3.95±0.56
51~100 km	9	4.03±0.73
> 100 km	20	4.31±0.66
不清楚	79	4.00±0.81

因素	r值	P值
家庭环境无障碍水平评价	0.603	< 0.001
公共环境无障碍水平评价	0.549	< 0.001
辅助器具功能效用性评价	0.562	< 0.001