Objective: To assess guide dog users' perspectives on the feasibility of telerehabilitation for their O&M needs.
Method: An online survey gathered insights from 56 guide dog (GD) users (Mean age = 59, Mean GD used = 4, Mean duration of use = 22 years). Thirteen GD users further participated in interviews or focus groups to explore survey responses. Data were analyzed using content analysis.
Findings: Most (40) were blind, and 16 had low vision, with intermediate (25) and advanced (25) communication technology proficiency. Most GD users (46) underwent residential training, and 10 received one-on-one visits. Qualitative analysis revealed acceptance of telerehabilitation services, citing accessibility as an advantage. However, GD users expressed concerns about safety, potential loss of behavioral observation, and social contact loss. Success depended on the type of technology, service type, and personal attributes.
Conclusion: While feasible, telerehabilitation services may not be universally suitable for all training stages. Flexibility and applicability in service design are necessary to accommodate individual preferences and experience levels.
Keywords: Telerehabilitation; assistive technology; blindness; guide dog; low vision; mobility.
Telerehabilitation of Orientation & Mobility (O&M) services for individuals that are blind or have low vision potentially offers a hybrid service delivery mode, reducing wait time and travel costs.A remote O&M service offer could allow rehabilitation professionals to provide services across borders, to rural and remote regions, and reach a broader client base.Rehabilitation professionals should collaborate with technology companies to improve remote rehabilitation service delivery and address clients’ concerns.Rehabilitation professionals should ensure that their approach to utilizing this telerehabilitation services is flexible and patient-centered, accommodating the client’s need for in-person services.