Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40773738›Full record

ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2025

Assessing Physical Therapists' Expectations and Experiences With an Automated Rehabilitation System Using Technology Acceptance Model: Multiple Methods Pilot Study.

Cynthia Williams, Lindsay Toth, Raine Osborne, Chloe E Bailey, Aishwarya Joshi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Cynthia Williams *School of Global Health Management and Informatics, College of Community Innovation and Education, University of Central Florida, 528 W. Livingston Street Ste 401, Orlando, FL, 32081, United States, 1 3212766287.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8344-7427
Lindsay TothDepartment of Clinical and Applied Movement Sciences, Brooks College of Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5856-2012
Raine Osborne *Department of Physical Therapy, Brooks College of Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1002-1310
Chloe E Bailey *Brooks Rehabilitation, Jacksonville, FL, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9306-1843
Aishwarya Joshi *School of Global Health Management and Informatics, College of Community Innovation and Education, University of Central Florida, 528 W. Livingston Street Ste 401, Orlando, FL, 32081, United States, 1 3212766287.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-8316-5431

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Wearable sensor systems maximize visual and clinical feedback for physical therapists to enhance patient outcomes in rehabilitation medicine. However, physical therapists must adopt and accept new technologies for full integration into routine care to advance the use of technology in clinical care. Their role in technology design is critical in adopting and implementing technology. Interprofessional collaboration should be supported in the design of rehabilitation-assisted technologies. Objective: We used the established tenets of the Technology Acceptance Model to describe physical therapists' expectations and experiences before and after using a novel wearable system in outpatient physical therapy. Methods: This multiple methods pilot study used a comparative pre-post survey and a qualitative semistructured focus group study design. Using purposive sampling, we recruited outpatient physical therapists to pilot the novel wearable technology, describe their expectations and experiences, and participate in a semistructured focus group discussion conducted to gather training and user experience information. Results: The study sample consisted of 5 physical therapists with an average age of 38.8 (SD 6.9) years and a work experience average of 12 (SD 7.7) years. Presurvey data show favorable expectations for usefulness and ease of use; however, favorability in both factors decreased after use. For perceived usefulness, all responses moved in the less favorable direction; mean difference -4.4 (SD 3.21); P=.04. All but 2 responses moved in the less favorable direction for overall perceived ease of use; mean difference -4.8 (SD 1.79); P=.04. Themed responses to open-ended questions in the postsurvey were feedback, setup time, accuracy, performance, and enhanced functional activities. Inductive content analysis of the focus group responses resulted in the following themes: system training, system benefits, system challenges, physical therapist perception of patients, and suggestions for improvement. The expectation for frequency of use decreased pre- to postexperience by 53% (mean -22, SD 14.40; P=.04). Conclusions: The Technology Acceptance Model-based survey responses and focus group themes outcomes demonstrated that physical therapists' expectations for using new technology were not met. Engaging physical therapists in piloting novel wearable technology highlights the importance of physical therapist engagement in developing, refining, and implementing wearable devices for rehabilitation.

Indexed as

inertia movement unitsmhealthmobile healthphysical therapyrehabilitationrehabilitation medicinesurveytechnology acceptance modeltechnology usewearableswearable technology

Identifiers

PMID40773738
PMCPMC12331194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.