Mixed methods usability evaluation of an assistive wearable robotic hand orthosis for people with spinal cord injury.
Jan Dittli, Jan T Meyer, Jessica Gantenbein and 6 others
PMID 38041135WHAT IT FOUND
Five people with spinal cord injury tried a wearable robotic hand for grasping.
Four improved their hand function scores, but one got worse because the device blocked their existing tenodesis grasp. Donning took almost five minutes and required assistance, which users disliked.
Key findings
01In the five participants who completed both sessions, mean Action Research Arm Test scores improved by 5.8 points with the device, but this change was not statistically significant (p = 0.28).
02Four of the five participants improved their hand function scores, while one participant with a strong tenodesis grasp performed worse because the device restricted their compensatory movements.
03Donning the device took an average of 4 minutes 55 seconds and always required assistance, which participants rated as the most cumbersome aspect of use.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat 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.
What it does not show
Only five of the fifteen recruited participants completed the full testing protocol, leaving a very small sample for the primary functional outcome. The Action Research Arm Test has not been validated for people with spinal cord injury. The study was conducted in a laboratory setting with assisted donning, which does not reflect real-world independent use. The device was only available in two sizes, which led to three participants dropping out because it did not fit. The study measured short-term usability only, so it cannot determine if benefits or frustrations would persist over time.
Declared interests
The authors declared no competing interests. The study was funded by NCCR Robotics, Gemeinnützige Stiftung ACCENTUS, and the ETH Zurich Foundation.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume the device improves hand function for all people with spinal cord injury. It helped four participants but worsened performance for one who relied on a tenodesis grasp, because the fixed wrist position blocked their existing compensatory movement.