MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977172650 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.16867255

Patients’ and therapists’ experience and perception of exoskeleton-based physiotherapy during subacute stroke rehabilitation: a qualitative analysis

2021· article· en· W6977172650 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvasion and Academic Success Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStroke (engine)Thematic analysisRehabilitationBalance (ability)Perspective (graphical)Qualitative researchExoskeletonIntervention (counseling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To explore the experience and acceptability of an exoskeleton-based physiotherapy program for non-ambulatory patients during subacute stroke rehabilitation from the perspective of patients and therapists. This was a qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis. Fourteen patients with stroke who participated in the experimental arm of a randomized controlled trial investigating the efficacy of exoskeleton-based physiotherapy were recruited. Six physiotherapists who provided the intervention were also recruited. Three themes were identified relating to the experience and acceptability of an exoskeleton-based physiotherapy program: (1) <i>A matter of getting into the swing of things</i> depicted the initial and ongoing learning process of using an exoskeleton; (2) <i>More of a positive experience than anything else</i> described the participants’ mostly favorable attitude toward exoskeleton-based gait training; and (3) <i>The best step forward</i> captured participant-identified recommendations and considerations for the future integration of exoskeleton training into stroke rehabilitation. Patients with stroke were even more optimistic than therapists toward the experience and benefits of exoskeleton-based gait training during subacute stroke rehabilitation. Future clinical practice should consider the balance between actual and perceived benefits, as well as the potential barriers to integrating an exoskeleton into stroke rehabilitation.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONPowered robotic exoskeletons can be used to provide higher duration and more repetitious walking practice for non-ambulatory patients with stroke.Patients with stroke view exoskeleton-based physiotherapy highly favorably, attributing greater opportunity and benefit to using the device during subacute rehabilitation.Physiotherapists should consider learning challenges, patient characteristics, and implementation barriers when integrating exoskeleton-based training within a treatment program. Powered robotic exoskeletons can be used to provide higher duration and more repetitious walking practice for non-ambulatory patients with stroke. Patients with stroke view exoskeleton-based physiotherapy highly favorably, attributing greater opportunity and benefit to using the device during subacute rehabilitation. Physiotherapists should consider learning challenges, patient characteristics, and implementation barriers when integrating exoskeleton-based training within a treatment program.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicEvasion and Academic Success FactorsFrench-language works237,207