Usability Evaluation of an Electrically Powered Orthopedic Exerciser: Focus Group Interview and Satisfaction Survey Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Musculoskeletal disorders significantly impair physical function and quality of life, necessitating systematic rehabilitation. Electrically powered orthopedic exercisers, such as continuous passive motion devices, are widely used to enhance joint mobility and muscle recovery. However, existing devices often lack advanced functionalities and user-specific adaptability, limiting their effectiveness. To address these shortcomings, the Rebless Pro was developed as a novel device supporting active and passive exercises with personalized treatment programs. Objective: This study aimed to conduct a formative usability evaluation of the Rebless Pro prototype using focus group interviews (FGIs) and satisfaction surveys with health care professionals specializing in rehabilitation medicine. The goal was to identify areas for improvement to enhance the safety, usability, and information clarity of the device. Unlabelled: Usability evaluation was performed at the National Rehabilitation Center with 10 participants (5 physiatrists and 5 physical therapists) who had prior experience using similar devices. FGIs were conducted to collect qualitative insights into user experiences, while satisfaction surveys provided quantitative data on ease of use of the user interface and identifiability and understanding of information. Data collection focused on identifying risk factors and usability challenges. Results: Three key areas for improvement were identified: (1) product upgrades to ensure patient safety, including adjustments to exercise speed and resistance; (2) hardware and software improvements to improve usability, including adjustments to the location of the emergency button and improvements to the graphical user interface elements; and (3) improvements to the user manual, including detailed contraindications, patient criteria, and clearer operating instructions. Although the mean score of physiatrists (mean 4.463, SD 0.298) was higher than that of physical therapists (mean 4.114, SD 0.829) in terms of the ease of use of the user interface, the difference was not statistically significant (P=.69). Similarly, in the category of identifiability and understanding of information, higher scores were again reported by physiatrists (mean score 4.467, SD 0.506) than by physical therapists (mean 3.733, SD 0.894), but this difference was also not statistically significant (P=.22). Conclusions: Usability evaluation provided actionable insights into improving the Rebless Pro's safety, usability, and information clarity. To further refine the device, iterative usability evaluations involving both health care professionals and patients are recommended. These efforts are expected to contribute to the development of a safe, effective, and user-friendly electrically powered orthopedic exerciser suitable for commercialization.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,025 | 0,027 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».