ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2026
Usability and Functional Outcomes of the Obi3 Robotic Feeding Device Among People With Disabilities, Caregivers, and Providers: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLoss of self-feeding ability due to severe bilateral upper extremity motor impairment (BUEMI) limits functional independence with a critical activity of daily living, increases medical risks, reduces social participation, and affects overall well-being. Robotic feeding devices are an emerging category of assistive technology. Obi3 is a third-generation, robotic feeding device, regulated in the United States as a Class I medical device and CE marked as a Class I device under the European Union Medical Device Regulation. The device is designed to enable people with BUEMI to independently select and safely consume food and liquid using accessible switches or interfaces while maintaining culturally normative dining practices. Although earlier Obi generations showed promise, comprehensive usability data across multiple stakeholder groups remains limited.
objectiveThis study evaluated the usability, safety, and clinical relevance of Obi3 in real-world use from the perspectives of people with BUEMI, caregivers, and rehabilitation providers. The findings were intended to generate evidence to inform clinical decision-making and determinations of medical necessity for potential DME coverage, consistent with the device's intended use and clinician-assessed implementation.
methodsA mixed methods usability study provided a 1-week home trial of Obi3. Quantitative measures included the System Usability Scale (SUS), survey items adapted from the Matching Person and Technology (MPT) framework, and self-feeding ratings based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health impairment scale. Paired-sample t tests, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and effect sizes (Cohen d) assessed changes in self-feeding scores. Qualitative data from open-ended survey responses and follow-up semistructured interviews were analyzed thematically to complement quantitative findings.
resultsA total of 50 participants were enrolled, of whom 42 completed follow-up surveys. Participants included 15 people with BUEMI (pediatric and adult), 14 caregivers, and 13 providers. Participants' mean self-feeding impairment scores decreased significantly from 3.80 (SD 0.41) at baseline to 0.60 (SD 0.74) post trial (n=15; t
conclusionsObi3 demonstrated high usability, safety, and clinical use in restoring self-feeding independence among individuals with severe BUEMI. Findings across people with BUEMI, caregivers, and providers support Obi3 as an effective DME that may enhance user autonomy and reduce caregiver burden. Lengthier longitudinal studies are needed to establish long-term clinical efficacy and health outcomes.
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.