Exploring Rehabilitation Patients' Perspectives on What Matters for the Adoption of Home-Based Rehabilitation Technology: Q-Methodology Study.
Karlijn E Te Boekhorst, Sanne J Kuipers, Gerard M Ribbers and 1 others
PMID 40632833WHAT IT FOUND
Patients with brain injury hold three distinct views on home rehab tech.
Some want fast recovery and simple setup. Others demand total independence and privacy. A third group relies heavily on therapist guidance and peer validation. One-size-fits-all designs fail.
Key findings
01Patients prioritized different outcomes: speed and simplicity, autonomy and privacy, or therapist guidance and peer support.
02All groups valued direct feedback during exercises and therapist approval, but rejected social media and peer comparison as primary drivers.
03Reducing travel to the center was not a priority for most participants, often because they lived nearby or had reimbursed transport.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
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.
What it does not show
The study included only 19 participants in the final analysis, which limits the generalizability of the viewpoints. Most participants had strokes, so findings may not apply to other types of brain injury. The study was conducted at a single urban center in the Netherlands, where transport costs are reimbursed, which may explain why avoiding travel was not a priority. Individuals with visual impairments were excluded, potentially missing perspectives relevant to accessibility. Only two participants had prior experience with home rehabilitation technology, so views may reflect expectations rather than practical reality.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was funded by a grant from the Dutch Brain Foundation.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the three viewpoints as fixed patient types or diagnostic categories. These are preferred approaches to technology adoption that may shift with recovery stage and personal goals. The small sample size means these patterns are hypotheses for further exploration, not established norms.