Should you be using these old newsletters, please bear in mind that the web addresses were correct when the newsletter was created but that they may not be accurate now. We do not plan to change the back issues of the newsletters.
The University of New Brunswick's Institute of Biomedical Engineering (IBME) is the recipient of support from the Atlantic Innovation Fund (AIF). The second round of AIF funding was announced in Fredericton on September 12.
Dr. Bernard Hudgins, the Director of IBME, will lead the project which will develop wireless eHealth devices for the rehabilitation field. IBME has been conducting research and developing technological tools for the medical and rehabilitation field for over thirty years, including the development of myoelectric control systems that have been incorporated into artificial limbs throughout the world.
Research in the areas of motion analysis and Telehealth/eHealth has been increasing over the last few years within the IBME, and this project is seen as an opportunity to merge the knowledge from both areas of expertise developing useful technology for the health care and research fields.
R&D will be conducted to produce motion analysis sensors and tools for use in health care and motion and performance analysis. The sensors will be incorporated into an appropriately fitting brace, material sleeve or an article of clothing and will be able to capture motion, shape, force and electromyographic information from joints such as knees and elbows. The motion will be reproduced from two angles (resulting in 3D representation) to address 2D limitations when using video analysis. These products will be developed using fibre optic measurement sensors and electronic accelerometers, electronic goniometers and load cells. This will include the combination of hardware and software which will evolve from wired motion analysis prototypes, to wireless motion analysis prototypes and eventually to extended-wear wireless prototypes.
The commercial partner, Measurand Inc., will provide its revolutionary 3D optic sensor products and technical, software and commercial support to the project. Other partners include the Stan Cassidy Centre for Rehabilitation, the Institute for Rehabilitation Research and Development in Ottawa and two orthopaedic surgeons.
The project with a total estimated cost of $3 million will receive up to $1.9 million from AIF over five years. For more information, contact Dr. Bernard Hudgins, Director, Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Tel: (506) 453-4966.
The Neil Squire Foundation (NSF) has been awarded almost half a million dollars to lay the groundwork for a Centre of Excellence in enabling technology. The Honourable Stephen Owen, Secretary of State responsible for Western Economic Diversification Canada (WED) announced on August 26 that the Vancouver-based Foundation would receive $450,000 to implement a strategic business plan for the centre of excellence, to enhance network opportunities for the centre and to explore the marketablility of enabling technologies. Enabling technology is any item, piece of equipment, or product that is used to increase, maintain or improve functional capabilities of individuals with physical disabilities. It is important both to people with disabilities and people who are growing older and who require more support from their environment.
The strategic plan will look at non-traditional funding mechanisms to create and maintain a community based Centre of Excellence in Enabling Technologies at the NSF and the Centre will bring together partners from business, academia and private/non-profit organizations to address such issues as the high social and economic cost experienced by people with disabilities and their families. The Centre will also look into the problems connected with the increasing cost and related impacts associated with the aging population, the need to contain healthcare costs through technology and the desire of people to live independently in the community for as long as they wish.
In addition to funding the strategic planning for the Centre, WED has included funding to assist the NSF in commercializing four of its enabling technologies. This is a departure from traditional funding initiatives, which seldom cover the later stages of commercialization such as intellectual property protection and management, the identification of commercial partners, technology transfer and market research. The NSF technologies to be supported are the Brain Computer Interface, which focuses on using brain waves to activate and control electronic devices without the user actually moving; the Palm Development Program, to make handheld computers such as Palm PCs accessible to people with severe mobility disabilities; SARAW (Speech Assisted Reading and Writing), an adult literacy software package which is currently available and for which international markets will be sought; and Work Place Injury Reduction Research, which is intended to turn workplace injury reduction technology into commercial products.
Announcing the funding, Minister Owen made specific reference to the contribution that innovative enabling technologies will make to the quality of life for many Canadians. Gary Birch, the NSF's Executive Director, said "new innovations in enabling technology have the potential to play an ever increasing role in helping Canadians with disabilities live full independent lives within their communities. As Canadians age, these same independence enhancing technologies will play a key role in helping them to continue to live in the community. We're extremely pleased to receive this vital support from Western Economic Diversification Canada and proud to be considered a centre of excellence for assistive devices in Canada."
For more information, visit the Neil Squire Foundation Web site at (www.neilsquire.ca) or e-mail them at info@neilsquire.ca .
On a bright and sunny October 9, on the steps of Parliament Hill, at 12:30 you would have seen a large group of folks wearing sunglasses and listening to Terry Kelly sing. You would also have noticed a large number of white canes and dog guides.
The occasion was World Sight Day and the message was that as much as 80% of blindness in countries around the world is avoidable through prevention programs or treatment. This message was reenforced by the launch of a CD-ROM tool kit that maps out a program that will save the vision of thousands of men, women and children and millions of dollars in health-care costs. The tool kit was developed in support of the international VISION 2020 resolution passed in May at the 56th World Health Assembly in Geneva. In Canada, the VISION 2020 partners are the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (http://www.cnib.ca), Christian Blind Mission International, Eyesight International, ORBIS, the National Coalition for Vision Health, Seva and Operation Eyesight Universal.
Over 100 countries have started national VISION 2020 projects, but Canada is among those that do not have a national blindness protection program in place. MPs were invited to participate in the day and understand "the Power of the Dream". In addition to receiving the CD-ROM, they were given sunglasses to highlight one of the simple steps that can be taken to protect the eyes from damage caused by ultra-violet rays.
The Canadian Abilities Foundation (CAF — http://www.enablelink.org) has launched a new on-line inventory of accessible facilities and services in comunities across Canada.
Access Guide Canada (ACG) covers everything from restaurants, places of worship, parks, accommodations and transportation to events and attractions. It makes it easier to find accessible services and resources. ACG also includes the Directory of Disability Organizations in Canada, making it an even more effective information tool.
Communities with information on local accessible resources are invited to contact are invited to contact Jason Bourque at 416-923-2885 extension 223 to be included in ACG.
- by Deb. Finn
NOTE: What follows is intended only to provide a snap-shot of some of the problems that people with different kinds of disabilities encounter when using information and communications technologies such as cellphones, and the discussions that have arisen over this issue. Nothing in this article should be interpreted as an indication of Industry Canada's opinion regarding this matter.]
Remember the days before everyone had a cellphone? Wouldn't you just be lost without one?
A growing number of Canadians look back fondly on the days before cellphones became a common commodity and far from being lost without one, they are to varying degrees lost with these devices. The reason is simple: most cellphones are not designed to meet the needs of users who have disabilities. For some users, cellphones provide no more functionality than that of traditional wireline telephones and design features that require vision, hearing or fine motor control can actually prevent people from using services that they pay for.
An Ottawa couple, Marie and Chris Stark, applied to the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), seeking a review and variance of CRTC94-19, the Commission's 1994 decision to allow the sale of terminal equipment such as telephones and the provision of services to be driven by market demand. It is the Starks' contention that the problem with this market-driven approach is that as new devices and services have been developed and introduced, they have failed to meet the needs of many customers who have disabilities, a group that is viewed by telecom companies as representing a very small market segment.
A complaint filed with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) by Marie Stark in 1999 was unsuccessful in moving the CRTC to change its mind about leaving telecom services to the whim of market forces. The CHRC ruled that it lacked the jurisdiction to review the CRTC's forbearance decision or to order the CRTC to exercise its regulatory powers under the Telecommunications Act.
The Starks contend that while it may have made sense in the early 90s to allow mainstream market demand to drive the industry, telecommunications technology and the services available have changed significantly over the past decade and consumers with disabilities are being left farther and farther behind. They point out in their current submission that this lack of accessibility is found both in wireline and wireless equipment and they maintain that Canada's telecom service providers have not shown willingness to address the inequitable levels of service they offer their customers who have disabilities and those who do not. Four disability organizations, ARCH: A Legal Resource Centre for Persons with Disabilities, the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB), the National Federation of the Blind: Advocates for Equality (NFB:AE) and the Canadian Hard of Hearing Association have filed submissions with the CRTC, agreeing with the Starks that Canada's telecom regulator needs to do something to correct the situation.
"No attention is being paid to the needs of people with disabilities" says Cathy Moore, the Director of Consumer and Government Relations for the CNIB. "We'd like to see telecom companies show some interest in the needs of these people and treat them as the significant market segment they represent."
To be fair, there are some accessible devices on the market, but they are often expensive or harder to find and for the most part, they are aimed at deaf or hard of hearing users, not at those who are blind or have low vision. Geoff FitzGibbon, the CNIB's National Manager, Technical Aids told me that for blind or partially sighted users two approaches have been pursued for the provision of an audible interface: "either a dedicated device that is a phone/PDA with a specialized voice output interface, or a regular cell phone that is specially programmed with screen reader software that transcribes everything on the screen and identifies each key that is pressed.
The first option is very expensive, and manufacturers have resisted this approach because its market is small compared to the overall cell phone market. Given the cut-throat nature of that market and its speed of technological change, the manufacturers' reluctance can be understood. I know of only one phone like this on the market, and the sole Canadian outlet is at the following link www.aroga.com.
The second approach is less expensive, but the software can only be downloaded into the very latest cell phones, which not all North American networks yet support. The pioneer in the field is a Spanish company; their website can be accessed at the following link, www.mobileaccessibility.com."
Cellphones present different barriers to different people, not just the blind or people with low vision. In order to get a sense of the problems encountered by different cellphone users, I recently spoke to a trio of professionals, all of whom are technically savvy individuals and all of whom have disabilities. Here's what they told me:
Jim Sanders has been a cellphone user since 1990 and he recently bought a new model. He's been told that it has all the latest features, but ask him what they are and he says, "I don't know." Mr. Sanders, the President and CEO of the CNIB, is blind. He says that none of the menu choices that are available to a sighted person using his cellphone are presented orally. This leaves Mr. Sanders unable to program his phone. Someone who can see the screen has to enter numbers in his directory or switch the phone from an audible ring to vibrate mode. The phone's text messaging capability is of no use to him either. "I can send and receive phone calls, but that's it".
Some cellphone service providers insist that customers, including those who are blind or partially sighted, can get sales staff to program features for them when they buy a new phone, but Mr. Sanders points out that you can't keep running back to the store, every time you need to add a new number to your speed dial or to reprogram your phone's features. You shouldn't have to rely on your family or friends to do those things for you either.
"What I'd like is to be able to use all the same features that a sighted person can use," he says. Given the technology today, that's a realistic wish. "I have access to all the features on my computer and the technology exists right now to give me a comparable level of access on my cellphone." When asked whether oral feedback of menus and text messaging can be done affordably, Mr. Sanders maintains, "if the technology to allow for oral feedback isn't built into the design of cellphones for the mass market, it will never be affordable."
The need to design accessibility features into products such as cellphones becomes an even greater concern when you consider the continuing convergence of devices such as cellphones, PDAs and computers. Mr. Sanders is deeply concerned that this convergence may result in what he describes as "a fairly significant chunk of bundled inaccessible technology." If that happens, he fears the impact this may have not only on people with disabilities, but on the rapidly aging society as a whole.
The trend towards smaller cellphones, with tiny keys and minuscule screens is also a problem for users with vision impairments. The size and font style on the screen can help or hinder users with limited vision.
Dr. Charles Laszlo is Professor Emeritus in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of British Columbia, Chairman of assistive listening device firm ALDS Inc. and a hard of hearing person who has occasionally used family members' cellphones. "We made sure that the phones we had were such that they have special neckloop attachments available" he says. "Without that, I could not use ANY cellphone."
For Dr. Laszlo, the ability to program a cellphone to vibrate mode is helpful because the ring tones may not be audible to him. He also appreciates text messaging capabilities. "In the latest phone we have, the messaging feature that can be addressed from E-mail is very good."
People who have hearing loss have differing needs that may be addressed by divergent solutions. Dr. Laszlo explains: "People with different levels of hearing loss, and using different kinds of hearing aids, have different needs. For people like me, the inductive neckloop is essential. This helps two ways. First, it places the phone away from my hearing aid so that interference generated by the phone is eliminated. Secondly, it allows the phone to be coupled to my hearing aid non-acoustically. This eliminates the problem of external noise and the distortion caused by holding the phone to the hearing aid.
For people who don't have a T-switch and the ability to use a neckloop, and must hold the phone in proximity to the hearing aid, interference is a problem. Hearing aid manufacturers have been working on this, and some phone accessories are now available to alleviate the problem."
While it is possible to find cellphones that are hearing-aid compatible, it's important to do some homework before you go phone shopping, rather than assume the salespeople you deal with will understand the requirements of hard of hearing customers. Salespeople may not be aware that digital cellphones can emit radio frequency interference from their anntennas and magnetic interference from their batteries, which can make the devices unusable by hearing aid users or people who have had cochlear implants.
Dr. Laszlo's "wish list" of the features he would like to see available for cellphones is relatively short and easy to accomplish. "What I would like to see is a "universal" coupling between phone and hearing aid that would use infrared or some other short-range coupling method that would circumvent the need for acoustical coupling between phone and hearing aid. This is technically possible.
I would also like to see inductive neckloops that don't use hearing aid batteries, but cheaper, commonly available consumer types. The cost of using an inductive neckloop designed for cellphones is very high since up to three hearing aid batteries are required. The small increase in size would not be much of a problem."
Indeed, with the introduction of devices that include video cameras and game-playing capabilities, we are already beginning to see slightly larger cellphones entering the market again. Such added features are not really feasible on ultra-tiny models.
For years, Dr. Gary Birch has had a cellphone in his car, but it's only recently that he also acquired one for use elsewhere. He's the Executive Director of the Neil Squire Foundation, a not-for-profit organization engaged in research to create devices, technologies and products that facilitate and improve the quality of life for adults with severe physical disabilities, seniors and people recovering from illness or injury. Dr. Birch has quadriplegia, but has some use of his fingers.
"I use my cellphone to make and receive calls and to track previous calls", he says. "I haven't bothered with features such as the directory or games. The features I need I can use, but for someone with less dexterity than I have, they'd be impossible. A high-quad would need to modify the cellphone to access some of its features."
What's frustrating to Dr. Birch is that there used to be a line of cellphones on the market that had an external port that could be used to link adaptive technology to the device. "The port was really there for diagnostic purposes and we worked for a while with the manufacturer to develop interfaces that would allow the cellphone to be linked to other devices. The interfaces were even demonstrated to the company's head office, but in the next generation of cellphones that were produced, the manufacturers had dropped the external port. I don't think they did this for cost reasons -- the costs involved were minimal. I think that the people with decision-making power just didn't realize the importance the external port could have for people with disabilities."
For people with severe mobility disabilities, the integration or interconnection of cellphones and other information/communication devices has the potential to increase accessibility. For example, some cellphones have an infra-red or other type of interface to PDAs, which gives the user the ability to carry out a wider range of electronic transactions. But unless accessibility hooks are built into these devices to enable them to be controlled, they may further marginalize people with disabilities. "For the most part, to make it easier to adapt these devices you only need to make some simple changes to the firmware" Dr. Birch contends. "We're not talking about a big cost to the manufacturers."
Dr. Birch also suggests that in addition to providing cellphones with a "hook" that allows them to be adapted for use by people who need alternative input or output methods, manufacturers should also provide some support, including technical support, to organizations that are trying to make the adaptive devices that will improve cellphone accessibility. "With people relying more and more on these technologies, inaccessible design can make it harder for people with disabilities to get into the mainstream. What we need is a way in to adapt these devices."
So what is to be done? Regulation has been put in place in other countries, particularly in the United States and Australia to ensure that the needs of telecom consumers with disabilities are respected and met. It should be noted however, that the US Federal Communications Commission is currently dealing with complaints that American telecom companies continue to provide services that fail to meet the needs of blind and low vision customers. The FCC is also handling complaints over the continued incompatibility of cellphones with hearing aids.
There is still a belief among many organizations of and for people with disabilities that Canadian regulation is needed. ARCH links the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which prohibits discrimination on such grounds as disability with the regulatory power identified in the Telecommunications Act. ARCH insists that the Charter puts the onus on the CRTC to assert its jurisdiction to regulate the accessibility of telecom services and the sale of terminal equipment, including wireless devices. It should be noted that while the CRTC has some legal powers relating to the sale and lease of terminal equipment by telecommunications carriers providing services on their own networks, other terminal equipment vendors and manufacturers are outside the direct influence of the Commission. What's more, there has been some debate among telecom service providers such as Bell Canada and Telus over whether the CRTC is the appropriate body to address the terminal equipment issue, given that the Commission does not set technical standards for terminal equipment.
Any regulation of telecom equipment aimed at improving the accessibility of devices and services requires study and consultation, if it is to be done right. Both ARCH and the CNIB recommended that the CRTC undertake a study to determine the telecom needs of people with disabilities. On September 23, the Commission sent a letter to all parties involved in the Starks' application, announcing that a research consultant will be hired to prepare a report, building on the information currently on the record of this decision. Once it has been submitted, the parties will be advised of the report's availability and a new procedure that takes into account the various requests on record will be implemented.
Meanwhile, Health Canada's Division of Aging and Seniors has granted a Population Health Fund contribution to the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) to conduct research that could help shed some light on how to improve the accessibility and usability of wireless and wireline phones. The CSA and the British Columbia Institute of Technology are working with older adults to determine how easily and effectively they can use common technologies after receiving some instruction. One of the items chosen for this testing is cellphones. The results of this research may be of benefit to the participants in the CRTC proceedings.
The CNIB believes telecom services must be made more accessible and that they need to be obtained easily. In their recent response to the CRTC's interrogatories the CNIB insisted that "the Telecommunications Act does mandate the CRTC to ensure that persons who are blind, deafblind or who have low vision have equal use and benefit from the telecommunications network at the same cost as other subscribers. The CRTC must ensure that terminals of all types are readily, easily and affordably available in real time in the marketplace... These terminals must be on the shelves of retailers, not as special or custom devices, but as an integral part of mainstream products offered to all Canadians."
Our Web site can be found at (www.at-links.gc.ca/as/) . At this site are all our old newsletters as well as different listings and links to other sites of interest. Should you be using these old newsletters, please bear in mind that the web addresses were correct when the newsletter was created but that they may not be accurate now. We do not plan to change the back issues of the newsletters.
If you would prefer to receive our newsletter on disk or by
e-mail, please contact us at the address below.
For more information or to get on our mailing list, please
contact:
Mary Frances Laughton or Deb Finn
Assistive Devices Industry Office
Industry Canada
P.O. Box 11490 Station H
Ottawa, Ontario
K2H 8S2
Tel: 613-990-4316 or 613-990-4297
fax: 613-998-5923
TTY: 613-998-3288
Internet: adio@crc.ca