Community and Health Research Unit, School of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, Brayford Pool, Lincolnshire, Lincoln, LN6 7TS, UK.
Diabetes Research Centre, College of Medicine, Biological Sciences and Psychology, Leicester General Hospital, Gwendolen Road, Leicester, LE5 4PW, UK.
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2021 Dec 25;18(1):181. doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00976-3.
In recent years, robotic rehabilitation devices have often been used for motor training. However, to date, no systematic reviews of qualitative studies exploring the end-user experiences of robotic devices in motor rehabilitation have been published. The aim of this study was to review end-users' (patients, carers and healthcare professionals) experiences with robotic devices in motor rehabilitation, by conducting a systematic review and thematic meta-synthesis of qualitative studies concerning the users' experiences with such robotic devices.
Qualitative studies and mixed-methods studies with a qualitative element were eligible for inclusion. Nine electronic databases were searched from inception to August 2020, supplemented with internet searches and forward and backward citation tracking from the included studies and review articles. Data were synthesised thematically following the Thomas and Harden approach. The CASP Qualitative Checklist was used to assess the quality of the included studies of this review.
The search strategy identified a total of 13,556 citations and after removing duplicates and excluding citations based on title and abstract, and full text screening, 30 studies were included. All studies were considered of acceptable quality. We developed six analytical themes: logistic barriers; technological challenges; appeal and engagement; supportive interactions and relationships; benefits for physical, psychological, and social function(ing); and expanding and sustaining therapeutic options.
Despite experiencing technological and logistic challenges, participants found robotic devices acceptable, useful and beneficial (physically, psychologically, and socially), as well as fun and interesting. Having supportive relationships with significant others and positive therapeutic relationships with healthcare staff were considered the foundation for successful rehabilitation and recovery.
近年来,机器人康复设备常用于运动训练。然而,迄今为止,尚无对探索机器人设备在运动康复中终端用户体验的定性研究进行系统评价。本研究旨在通过对有关机器人设备用户体验的定性研究进行系统评价和主题元分析,来回顾终端用户(患者、护理人员和医疗保健专业人员)在运动康复中使用机器人设备的体验。
合格的研究包括定性研究和混合方法研究,且具有定性元素。从建库开始到 2020 年 8 月,我们对 9 个电子数据库进行了检索,同时还对纳入研究和综述文章进行了互联网搜索以及向前和向后的引文追踪。根据托马斯和哈登的方法对数据进行主题合成。本综述使用 CASP 定性清单来评估纳入研究的质量。
检索策略共确定了 13556 条引文,经过去重和根据标题和摘要以及全文筛选排除引文后,共纳入 30 项研究。所有研究均被认为具有可接受的质量。我们开发了六个分析主题:逻辑障碍;技术挑战;吸引力和参与度;支持性互动和关系;对身体、心理和社会功能的益处;以及扩大和维持治疗选择。
尽管参与者经历了技术和逻辑方面的挑战,但他们认为机器人设备是可接受的、有用的和有益的(在身体、心理和社会方面),并且有趣。与重要他人建立支持性关系以及与医疗保健人员建立积极的治疗关系被认为是成功康复和恢复的基础。