Pragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, Canada.
Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montréal, Canada.
Disabil Rehabil. 2020 Jun;42(11):1490-1494. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2018.1550531. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
It has been proposed that rehabilitation practice expand its aims beyond recovery to "ultrabilitation," but only if certain biological, technological, and psychosocial conditions are met. There is thus an opportunity to connect ultrabilitation, as a concept, to adjacent literature on assistive technology and sociotechnical systems. We draw on insights from sociology of technology and responsible innovation, as well as concrete examples of neural devices and the culture of rehabilitation practice, to further refine our understanding of the conditions of possibility for ultrabilitation. "Assistive" technologies can indeed be re-imagined as "ultrabilitative," but this shift is both psychosocial and technological in nature, such that rehabilitation professionals will likely play a key role in this shift. There is not, however, sufficient evidence to suggest whether they will support or hinder ultrabilitative uses of technology. Advancing the idea and project of ultrabilitation must be grounded in a nuanced understanding of actual rehabilitation practice and the norms of broader society, which can be gained from engaging with adjacent literatures and by conducting further research on technology use in rehabilitation contexts.Implications for rehabilitation"Assistive" technologies can be conceptually re-imagined as "ultrabilitative" technologies, expanding their utility from recovery to enhancement and flourishing.Actual development and use of ultrabilitative technology is both a technical and psychosocial challenge, and its success depends on the cultural context in which technology is situated.Further empirical research is needed on the ways in which rehabilitation culture and the norms of broader society might impact or even inhibit the use of ultrabilitative technology.
有人提出，康复实践的目标应该超越恢复，扩展到“超康复”，但前提是必须满足某些生物、技术和社会心理条件。因此，有机会将超康复作为一个概念与辅助技术和社会技术系统的相关文献联系起来。我们借鉴了技术社会学和负责任创新的观点，以及神经设备和康复实践文化的具体实例，以进一步深化我们对超康复可能性条件的理解。“辅助”技术确实可以被重新想象为“超康复”技术，但这种转变既是社会心理上的，也是技术上的，因此康复专业人员可能在这一转变中发挥关键作用。然而，目前没有足够的证据表明他们会支持还是阻碍超康复技术的使用。推进超康复的理念和项目必须建立在对实际康复实践和更广泛社会规范的细致理解之上，这可以通过参与相关文献和对康复背景下技术使用进行进一步研究来实现。
对康复的意义“辅助”技术可以从概念上重新想象为“超康复”技术，将其用途从恢复扩展到增强和繁荣。
超康复技术的实际开发和使用既是技术上的也是社会心理上的挑战，其成功取决于技术所处的文化背景。
需要进一步进行实证研究，了解康复文化和更广泛社会规范的方式可能会影响甚至抑制超康复技术的使用。
