An Intensive Upper Extremity Program Coupled With a Wearable Device for Poststroke Rehabilitation: A Qualitative Study of the Perspectives of People With Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Virtual Arm Boot Camp program (V-ABC) was one of the first virtually delivered upper extremity exercise programs coupled with a novel wearable device that provided reach-to-grasp feedback for individuals with stroke. Understanding the experience of participants is critical to improving the implementation of rehabilitation interventions that embed biosensor technology within rehabilitation. DESIGN: A qualitative study embedded within a multi-center randomized controlled trial conducted on the CanStroke Recovery Trials Platform was used to investigate the experiences of participants post-stroke with the V-ABC program. A qualitative descriptive methodology was used to examine the acceptability of the program, factors influencing its effectiveness, and key elements for practical implementation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted via video conferencing with participants who had completed the program. Conventional content analysis was conducted to analyze the data. Strategies including triangulation, regular analytical meetings, peer examination, and reflexivity were used to increase the trustworthiness. SETTING: Interviews were conducted via videoconferencing using Zoom software. PARTICIPANTS: Nineteen participants post-stroke (10 males/8 females, mean age = 60.2 [SD = 12.2] years; mean length of time since stroke = 217.0 [SD = 109.2] days) after completion of the program. INTERVENTION: The 3-week V-ABC program consisted of exercise, feedback from a wearable device on the use of the paretic upper extremity, and therapist support. RESULTS: Three themes describing the experiences of participants with the program were identified: (1) V-ABC provided motivating practice; (2) equipment and technology setup provided accessibility but posed challenges; and (3) increased use of the paretic hand can be integrated into daily life with varying degrees of success. CONCLUSIONS: An intensive, virtually delivered upper extremity exercise program coupled with biosensing feedback on hand use from a wearable device was reported to be motivating, accessible, and facilitated use of paretic hands in daily life. The findings may help improve the future implementation of the V-ABC program and similar approaches involving telerehabilitation and wearable technology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".