Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies

Date Submitted: Oct 31, 2024
Date Accepted: Mar 7, 2025

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Physiotherapists’ User Acceptance of a Lower Limb Robotic Exoskeleton in Specialized Rehabilitation: Qualitative Exploratory Study

Olimb Hillkirk A, Skavberg Roaldsen K, Johnsen HM

Physiotherapists’ User Acceptance of a Lower Limb Robotic Exoskeleton in Specialized Rehabilitation: Qualitative Exploratory Study

JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol 2025;12:e68233

DOI: 10.2196/68233

PMID: 40238235

PMCID: 12044315

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Physiotherapists’ User Acceptance of a Lower Limb Robotic Exoskeleton in Specialized Rehabilitation: A Qualitative Study

  • Anstein Olimb Hillkirk; 
  • Kirsti Skavberg Roaldsen; 
  • Hege Mari Johnsen

ABSTRACT

Background:

Robotic lower limb exoskeletons have emerged as promising tools in clinical rehabilitation of patients with lower limb paralysis due to neurological disease, stroke, or spinal cord injury. Identified benefits in gait function rehabilitation include improved gait function, cardiovascular effects, enhanced training quality, patient motivation, and reduced physical and psychological workload for therapists. Despite the identified benefits, successful adoption of this technology largely depends on therapists’ user acceptance.

Objective:

The aim of this study was to explore physiotherapists’ perceptions of using robot-assisted lower-limb gait training in specialized neurological rehabilitation by using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) framework.

Methods:

A qualitative, exploratory research design with a deductive approach was used. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven expert physiotherapists in a Norwegian specialized rehabilitation hospital. Data collection and analysis were guided by the UTAUT framework.

Results:

The physiotherapists’ use of lower limb exoskeletons was greatly influenced by perceived benefits for patients or by challenges such as usability issues, the time required for adjustment to each patient, and lack of personnel resources to facilitate their use. Thus, perceived usefulness and facilitating conditions (or lack thereof) had a great influence on physiotherapist intentions to use and on actual use of the exoskeleton.

Conclusions:

This study identified several factors influencing the physiotherapists’ acceptance and integration of the lower limb exoskeleton. Available resources such as time and personnel were emphasized as important factors to increase use of the exoskeleton in specialized rehabilitation. Our findings may inform service providers and engineers in specialized neurological rehabilitation settings.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Olimb Hillkirk A, Skavberg Roaldsen K, Johnsen HM

Physiotherapists’ User Acceptance of a Lower Limb Robotic Exoskeleton in Specialized Rehabilitation: Qualitative Exploratory Study

JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol 2025;12:e68233

DOI: 10.2196/68233

PMID: 40238235

PMCID: 12044315

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.