↓ Skip to main content

Usability Evaluation of a VibroTactile Feedback System in Stroke Subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Usability Evaluation of a VibroTactile Feedback System in Stroke Subjects
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2016.00098
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeremia P. Held, Bart Klaassen, Bert-Jan F. van Beijnum, Andreas R. Luft, Peter H. Veltink

Abstract

To increase the functional capabilities of stroke subjects during activities of daily living, patients receive rehabilitative training to recover adequate motor control. With the goal to motivate self-training by use of the arm in daily life tasks, a sensor system (Arm Usage Coach, AUC) was developed that provides VibroTactile (VT) feedback if the patient does not move the affected arm above a certain threshold level. The objective of this study is to investigate the usability of this system in stroke subjects. The study was designed as a usability and user acceptance study of feedback modalities. Stroke subjects with mild to moderate arm impairments were enrolled. The subjects wore two AUC devices one on each wrist. VT feedback was given by the device on the affected arm. A semi-structured interview was performed before and after a measurement session with the AUC. In addition, the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire was given. Ten ischemic chronic stroke patients (39 ± 38 months after stroke) were recruited. Four out of 10 subjects have worn the VT feedback on their dominant, affected arm. In the pre-measurement interview, eight participants indicated a preference for acoustic or visual over VT feedback. In the post evaluation interview, nine of 10 participants preferred VT over visual and acoustic feedback. On average, the AUC gave VT feedback six times during the measurement session. All participants, with the exception of one, used their dominant arm more then the non-dominant. For the SUS, eight participants responded above 80%, one between 70 and 80%, and one participant responded below 50%. More patients accepted and valued VT feedback after the test period, hence VT is a feasible feedback modality. The AUC can be used as a telerehabilitation device to train and maintain upper extremity use in daily life tasks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 14%
Student > Master 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 20 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 16%
Engineering 11 14%
Neuroscience 7 9%
Computer Science 5 6%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 25 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 January 2017.
All research outputs
#18,525,776
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#3,422
of 6,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#309,738
of 419,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#13
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,674 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 419,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.