Acceptability Of The Use Of Devices With User Interfaces In Neurological Motor Rehabilitation
Keywords:
acceptability, user interface, neurological motor rehabilitation, ergonomicsAbstract
Introduction: The advance of new technologies has contributed to raising the interaction options of people with products from the use of user interfaces. The use of devices with user interfaces, designed as supports aimed at neurological rehabilitation, can enhance and diversify this process in intra-hospital and extrahospital contexts.
Objective: Identify the criteria that determine the acceptability of these devices in the motor rehabilitation of patients with neurological diseases.
Methods: The sample consisted of 31 patients from the Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery who needed motor rehabilitation and a control group (N = 62) with healthy individuals. A questionnaire with 32 items was created and it explored the acceptability criteria of user interfaces. The final version of the questionnaire was obtained from the evaluation according to expert criteria and the calculation of internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha. To the values obtained during the application of the questionnaire, there was performed a factor analysis using the normalized varimax as the rotation method. The criterion for factor extraction was the Scree eigenvalue method.
Results: The acceptability of the use of devices with user interfaces is conditioned by three fundamental categories: security, expectations and ease of assimilation.
Conclusions: The acceptability of these devices depends on guaranteeing safety in their use, meeting the expectations of an autonomous rehabilitation and making evident and viable their ease of assimilation. Having these criteria, results in obtaining ergonomic requirements for the design of these devices.
Downloads
References
1. Herrera R. Interfaces para humanos: más allá de los teclados y ratones. Ingeniare. Revista chilena de ingeniería 2015;23(2):162-3.
2. zPitale A, Bhumgara A. Human Computer Interaction Strategies—Designing the User Interface. In: IEEE, editor. 2019 International Conference on Smart Systems and Inventive Technology (ICSSIT); Tirunelveli, India2019. p. 752-8.
3. Ruiz A, Arciniegas JL, Giraldo WJ. Caracterización de marcos de desarrollo de la interfaz de usuario para sistemas interactivos basados en distribución de contenido de video. Ingeniare. Revista chilena de ingeniería 2018;26(2):339-53.
4. Alonso-Valerdi LM, Ramirez- Mendoza RA. Motor imagery based brain–computer interfaces: An emerging technology to rehabilitate motor deficits. Neuropsychologia 2015;79(part B):354-63.
5. Gelber DA. Neurologic Examination in Rehabilitation. Continuum Lifelong Learning Neurol 2011;17(3):449-61.
6. Renaud K, Van Biljon J. Predicting technology acceptance and adoption by the elderly: a qualitative study. In: Enlighten, editor. Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists; Wilderness, South Africa: Universidad de Glasgow; 2008 octubre. p. 210-9.
7. Li Q, Luximon Y. Understanding Older Adults’ Post-adoption Usage Behavior and Perceptions of Mobile Technology. International Journal of Design 2018;12(3):93-110.
8. Bevan N, Carter J, Earthy J, Geis T, Harker S. New ISO standards for usability, usability reports and usability measures. Human Computer Interaction. Theory, design, Development and practice; 2016: Springer, Cham.
9. Zahabi M, Kaber DB, Swangnetr M. Usability and safety in electronic medical records interface design: a review of recent literature and guideline formulation. Hum Factors 2015 Aug;57(5):805-34.
10. Dhillon G, Oliveira T, Susarapu S, Caldeira M. Deciding between information security and usability: Developing value based objectives. Computers in Human Behavior 2016;61:656-66.
11. Harte R, Quinlan LR, Glynn L, Rodríguez-Molinero A, Baker PMA, Scharf T, et al. Human-centered design study: enhancing the usability of a mobile phone app in an integrated falls risk detection system for use by older adult users. 2017: 5(5); e71. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 2017 May;5(5):e71.
12. Kalakoski V, Henelius A, Oikarinen E, Ukkonen A, Puolamäki K. Cognitive ergonomics for data analysis. Experimental study of cognitive limitations in a data-based judgement task. Behaviour and Information Technology 2019;38(10):1038-47.
13. Diego-Mas J, Garzon-Leal D, Poveda-Bautista R, Maerzal-Alcaide J. User-interfaces layout optimization using eye-tracking, mouse movements and genetic algorithms. Applied ergonomics 2019;78:197-209.
14. Pérez M, García-Morales L, Coromina-Hernández JC, Álvarez-González MA, Balmaseda-Serrano R, Manzanero AL. Memoria visual en la tercera edad. Regularidades para el diseño de interfaces. Ingeniería Industrial 2020;41(3):1-11.
15. Mayer S, Gad P, Wolf K, Wozniak PW, Henze N. Understanding the ergonomic constraints in designing for touch surfaces. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services; 2017; Viena, Austria.
16. Aiken LR. Content Validity and Reliability of Single Items or Questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1980;40(4):955–9.
17. Penfield RD, Giacobbi PRJ. Applying a score confidence interval to Aiken’s item content-relevance index. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science 2004;8(4):213–25.
18. Wilson E. Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1927;22(158):209–12.
19. Soto C, Segovia J. Intervalos de confianza asimétricos para el índice la validez de contenido: Un programa Visual Basic para la V de Aiken. Annals of Psychology 2009;25(1):169-71.
20. Ramírez-Fernández C, Morán AL, García- Canseco E, Montalvo-Gómez JR. Evaluation Results of an Ontology-based Design Model of Virtual Environments for Upper Limb Motor Rehabilitation of Stroke Patients. Methods Inf Med 2017 Mar;56(2):145-55.
21. Steiner B, Elgert L, Saalfeld B, Schwartze J, Borrmann HP, Kobelt-Ponicke A, et al. Health-enabling technologies for telerehabilitation of the shoulder: a feasibility and user acceptance study. Methods Inf Med 2020;Aug 10:artículo en impresión.
22. Lennon S, McKenna S, Jones F. Self-management programmes for people post stroke: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2013;27(10):867–78.
23. Stephenson A, Pedlow K, McDonough Z, Holmes D, Charles D, Barbabella F, et al. Evaluation of the acceptability and usability of the MAGIC-GLASS virtual reality solution as part of the care pathway in people with acute, sub-acute and chronic stroke: a study protocol. Physical Therapy Reviews 2020;25(2):118-27.
24. Vaezipour A, Whelan BM, Walk K, Theodoros D. Acceptance of rehabilitation technology in adults with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury, their caregivers, and healthcare professionals: a systematic review. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2019 Jul/Aug;34(4):e67-e82.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Aquellos autores/as que tengan publicaciones con esta revista, aceptan los términos siguientes: Los autores/as conservarán sus derechos de autor y garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, el cuál estará simultáneamente sujeto a la Licencia de reconocimiento de Creative Commons (CC-BY-NC 4.0) que permite a terceros compartir la obra siempre que se indique su autor y su primera publicación esta revista. Los autores/as podrán adoptar otros acuerdos de licencia no exclusiva de distribución de la versión de la obra publicada (p. ej.: depositarla en un archivo telemático institucional o publicarla en un volumen monográfico) siempre que se indique la publicación inicial en esta revista. Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as difundir su obra a través de Internet (p. ej.: en archivos telemáticos institucionales o en su página web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, lo cual puede producir intercambios interesantes y aumentar las citas de la obra publicada. (Véase El efecto del acceso abierto).
Como Revista Cubana de Investigaciones Biomédicas forma parte de la red SciELO, una vez los artículos sean aceptados para entrar al proceso editorial (revisión), estos pueden ser depositados por parte de los autores, si estan de acuerdo, en SciELO preprints, siendo actualizados por los autores al concluir el proceso de revisión y las pruebas de maquetación.
