OTCohortJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2023

Examining Usability, Acceptability, and Adoption of a Self-Directed, Technology-Based Intervention for Upper Limb Rehabilitation After Stroke: Cohort Study.

Michelle Broderick, Robert O'Shea, Jane Burridge and 3 others

PMID 37603405

WHAT IT FOUND

Most stroke survivors could use a self-directed gaming device, averaging 26 minutes of daily arm training.

However, those with more severe strokes found it less acceptable. Usability and ease of use predicted actual daily use, while intent to use did not.

Key findings

01The device was usable for 26 of 30 participants, with 4 unable to use it due to severe motor impairment.

02Participants engaged with the device for a median of 26 minutes daily, which increased the conventional upper limb training dose.

03Higher stroke severity (NIHSS) was significantly correlated with lower overall technology acceptance.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study was a small, single-center feasibility cohort (n=30), limiting generalizability. The custom usability scale was not validated against standard tools like the System Usability Scale. The survey was administered only after the intervention, missing potential changes in acceptance over time. Participants with severe communication or cognitive deficits were excluded, so findings do not apply to that group. Correlations do not prove causation; it is unclear if severity caused lower acceptance or if other factors were involved.

Declared interests

One author (PB) was part of the scientific group involved in the early development and testing of the GripAble technology used in the study.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume this device improves clinical outcomes. The study measured usability and time spent, not motor recovery. The positive finding of increased training time does not prove that this time translated to better functional results.

Read it on PubMed →