Application of the extended technology acceptance model to explore
clinician likelihood to use robotics in rehabilitation of the
neurologically impaired upper limb.
Abstract
Rationale, aims and objectives There is a high prevalence of upper limb
impairment following a stroke in both the acute and chronic phases of
recovery. Evidence suggests that patients do not receive recommended
amounts of task specific practice. Robotics provide a potential solution
to address this gap but clinical adoption is low. Studies have found
that adoption of technology is largely determined by perceived ease of
use and perceived usefulness. The aim of this study was to utilise the
extended technology acceptance model (TAM2) as a framework to identify
factors influencing clinician adoption of a robotic device into clinical
practice. Methods Mixed methods study including survey data and focus
group discussions across two health services. Participants were allied
health professionals whose primary caseload is rehabilitation of the
neurologically impaired upper limb. TAM2 surveys were collected pre/post
exposure to and use of a robotic device for a period of 3-months. Focus
groups were conducted at conclusion of the 3-month period of using the
robotic device. Results A total of 34 rehabilitation clinicians
completed the pre/post TAM2 surveys. Results indicate that following
exposure to the robotic device, there was a statistically significant
change in perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Two focus
groups with 12 participants revealed that lack of experience and
protected time to learn how to use such devices were strong moderators
of perceived behavioural control. Conclusion This study found that
perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use can be moderated through
experience. Clinicians reported a need for embedded technological
support during the introductory phase of a robotic device in order to
acquire the skills for safe and effective use. However, embedded support
is rarely offered, suggesting there is a discordance between current
implementation of robotic devices into practice and the learning needs
of rehabilitation clinicians.