ArticleBMC health services research2025
The complexity of home-based rehabilitation technology implementation for post-stroke motor rehabilitation in the Netherlands.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decision-centered wearable biosensors for personalized rehabilitation: integrating multimodal monitoring, artificial intelligence, and closed-loop intervention.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Exploring Rehabilitation Patients' Perspectives on What Matters for the Adoption of Home-Based Rehabilitation Technology: Q-Methodology Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRehabilitation technology is a growing field, but the sustainable implementation of these technologies, particularly in home settings, is lacking. The aim of this study was to explore the factors influencing the uptake of stroke rehabilitation technology among various stakeholders, including developers, healthcare professionals, individuals who had strokes, strategic experts, management and innovation staff, health insurers, and the National Health Care Institute.
methodsIn total, 22 semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive stakeholder sample. The Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework was used as the theoretical basis for the interview design. The interview content was analysed to generate (sub)themes representing factors influencing the implementation of home-based rehabilitation technology. These (sub)themes were organised according to the NASSS framework domains to ensure a systematic and theoretically grounded analysis.
resultsTen influencing factors emerged, nine of which fell within six of the seven NASSS domains. These factors include: (1) the unpredictable aftermath of stroke, (2) technology (mis)alignment with care delivery processes and end users' preferences, (3) disparities in the assessment of technology's value, (4) differences in commercial and university developers' interests, (5) patient group capabilities, (6) perceived workload, (7) formal implementation plans in rehabilitation centres, (8) laws and regulations, and (9) the financial system. The factor that did not align with a single NASSS domain was: (10) the fragmentation of responsibilities among diverse stakeholders.
conclusionThis study shows that the sustainable implementation of home-based rehabilitation technology faces several challenges across multiple domains of the NASSS framework. Effective collaboration among stakeholders is crucial for addressing these challenges but is currently hindered by fragmented responsibilities. To improve collaboration, it is essential to clearly define the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders. Additionally, national-level policies adopting a systems approach are necessary to align these responsibilities and foster effective collaboration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.