Investigating a Telerehabilitation Platform Integrated With a Rehabilitation Robot Using Microsoft HoloLens 2 for Upper-Limb Therapy: Pilot Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Upper-limb impairments following conditions such as stroke and spinal cord injury contribute significantly to long-term disability. Many survivors of stroke face limited access to rehabilitation due to geographical, financial, or scheduling barriers, leaving unmet therapeutic needs. Objective: This study conducted a preliminary evaluation of the usability of a novel telerehabilitation platform integrating a portable, desktop-mounted robot (DMRbotV3) with a mixed reality HoloLens 2 application to support accessible and adaptive upper-limb neurorehabilitation. Methods: This was a pilot usability study. Six participants, 3 (50%) stroke survivors (≥3 months after the event) recruited from a hospital stroke registry and 3 (50%) occupational therapists (≥1 year of clinical experience) recruited through convenience sampling in the Greater Milwaukee region, completed a single 2-hour session using the telerehabilitation platform in the BioRobotics laboratory at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Participants tried out the system, which delivered passive, active, and resistive exercises through DMRbotV3 combined with interactive mixed reality displays, and then completed a customized usability questionnaire. Data collected included (1) robotic parameters from onboard sensors (joint position, velocity, and interaction forces); (2) participant usability feedback from questionnaires to assess usability, satisfaction, and user engagement; and (3) documentation of adverse events and safety concerns. Descriptive statistics (mean scores and ranges) were used to analyze usability ratings and performance parameters. Results: The system was safe and well tolerated, with no adverse events reported. All participants completed the session, and usability scores averaged ≥4.0 across all items, reflecting high satisfaction and engagement with mixed reality integration. The robotic system demonstrated smooth performance, with controlled joint velocity profiles (-10 m/s to +10 m/s) and adaptive interaction forces up to approximately 25 N. Conclusions: This preliminary study supports the usability of combining robotics and mixed reality technologies into a telerehabilitation platform for upper-limb neurorehabilitation. Participant feedback also identified opportunities for refinement to enhance adaptability and personalization of therapy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".