How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRR’s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program

A review on the usability,flexibility, affinity, and affordability of virtual technology for rehabilitation training of upper limb amputees

(1) Background: Prosthetic rehabilitation is essential for upper limb amputees to regain their ability to work. However, the abandonment rate of prosthetics is higher than 50% due to the high cost of rehabilitation. Virtual technology shows potential for improving the availability and cost-effectiveness of prosthetic rehabilitation. This article systematically reviews the application of virtual technology for the prosthetic rehabilitation of upper limb amputees.(2) Methods: We followed PRISMA review guidance, STROBE, and CASP to evaluate the included articles. Finally, 17 articles were screened from 22,609 articles.(3) Results: This study reviews the possible benefits of using virtual technology from four aspects: usability, flexibility, psychological affinity, and long-term affordability. Three significant challenges are also discussed: realism, closed-loop control, and multi-modality integration.(4) Conclusions: Virtual technology allows for flexible and configurable control rehabilitation, both during hospital admissions and after discharge, at a relatively low cost. The technology shows promise in addressing the critical barrier of current prosthetic training issues, potentially improving the practical availability of prosthesis techniques for upper limb amputees

Validation of the GUESS-18: A Short Version of the Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (GUESS)

The Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (GUESS) is a 55-item tool assessing nine constructs describing video game satisfaction. While the development of the GUESS followed best practices and resulted in a versatile, comprehensive tool for assessing video game user experience, responding to 55 items can be cumbersome in situations where repeated assessments are necessary. The aim of this research was to develop a shorter version of the scale for use in iterative game design, testing, and research. Two studies were conducted: the first one to create a configural model of the GUESS that was then truncated to an 18-item short scale to establish an initial level of validity and a second study with a new sample to demonstrate cross-sample validity of the 18- item GUESS scale. Results from a confirmatory factor analysis of the 18-item scale demonstrated excellent fit and construct validity to the original nine construct instrument. Use of the GUESS-18 is encouraged as a brief, practical, yet comprehensive measure of video game satisfaction for practitioners and researchers

JNER at 15 years: analysis of the state of neuroengineering and rehabilitation.

On JNER's 15th anniversary, this editorial analyzes the state of the field of neuroengineering and rehabilitation. I first discuss some ways that the nature of neurorehabilitation research has evolved in the past 15 years based on my perspective as editor-in-chief of JNER and a researcher in the field. I highlight increasing reliance on advanced technologies, improved rigor and openness of research, and three, related, new paradigms - wearable devices, the Cybathlon competition, and human augmentation studies - indicators that neurorehabilitation is squarely in the age of wearability. Then, I briefly speculate on how the field might make progress going forward, highlighting the need for new models of training and learning driven by big data, better personalization and targeting, and an increase in the quantity and quality of usability and uptake studies to improve translation

Future bathroom: A study of user-centred design principles affecting usability, safety and satisfaction in bathrooms for people living with disabilities

Research and development work relating to assistive technology 2010-11 (Department of Health) Presented to Parliament pursuant to Section 22 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 197

Combining brain-computer interfaces and assistive technologies: state-of-the-art and challenges

In recent years, new research has brought the field of EEG-based Brain-Computer Interfacing (BCI) out of its infancy and into a phase of relative maturity through many demonstrated prototypes such as brain-controlled wheelchairs, keyboards, and computer games. With this proof-of-concept phase in the past, the time is now ripe to focus on the development of practical BCI technologies that can be brought out of the lab and into real-world applications. In particular, we focus on the prospect of improving the lives of countless disabled individuals through a combination of BCI technology with existing assistive technologies (AT). In pursuit of more practical BCIs for use outside of the lab, in this paper, we identify four application areas where disabled individuals could greatly benefit from advancements in BCI technology, namely,“Communication and Control”, “Motor Substitution”, “Entertainment”, and “Motor Recovery”. We review the current state of the art and possible future developments, while discussing the main research issues in these four areas. In particular, we expect the most progress in the development of technologies such as hybrid BCI architectures, user-machine adaptation algorithms, the exploitation of users’ mental states for BCI reliability and confidence measures, the incorporation of principles in human-computer interaction (HCI) to improve BCI usability, and the development of novel BCI technology including better EEG devices

Validation of the GUESS-18 for the Usability of a Virtual Reality Racing Game

Virtual reality (VR) technology has been in development for many decades, with recent strides in the consumer market. Head-mounted displays (HMDs) provide an immersive VR experience by inserting users into an artificially constructed digital world. However, there is currently no standardized tool for measuring the usability of a VR system or environment. The GUESS-18 is a validated usability questionnaire designed for measuring the usability of video games with 9 factors present in video games. The objective of this study was to validate the GUESS-18 for measuring the usability of VR in a gaming environment. Participants played Assetto Corsa, a racing game, with an HMD in VR and with a traditional monitor. The best lap times were recorded as a performance measure. Errors were also recorded, which included driving off the track or colliding with a wall. Users answered the GUESS-18 and the System Usability Scale (SUS) after their experience. They also answered the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) before and after using VR. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed to determine the validity of the GUESS-18’s measurements for usability of the racing game in VR. The GUESS-18 is an accurate and effective tool for measuring usability of the game in VR. The Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) values indicate appropriate model fit, with values of 0.967 and 0.056, respectively. VR yielded significantly faster lap times by about 5%. No other differences were found for performance. Usability scores from the GUESS-18 were significantly higher in the VR condition than the traditional monitor by about 6.4%. SSQ scores were significantly higher after engaging with VR by 282.5%. No differences were found for SUS scores between display conditions. We also found that playing the game in VR resulted in greater immersion and personal gratification than playing with the monitor. Future research should focus on the development and validation of a generalized VR usability tool that captures the latent factors when using a VR system

Serious Games Are Not Serious Enough for Myoelectric Prosthetics

Serious games show a lot of potential for use in movement rehabilitation (eg, after a stroke, injury to the spinal cord, or limb loss). However, the nature of this research leads to diversity both in the background of the researchers and in the approaches of their investigation. Our close examination and categorization of virtual training software for upper limb prosthetic rehabilitation found that researchers typically followed one of two broad approaches: (1) focusing on the game design aspects to increase engagement and muscle training and (2) concentrating on an accurate representation of prosthetic training tasks, to induce task-specific skill transfer. Previous studies indicate muscle training alone does not lead to improved prosthetic control without a transfer-enabling task structure. However, the literature shows a recent surge in the number of game-based prosthetic training tools, which focus on engagement without heeding the importance of skill transfer. This influx appears to have been strongly influenced by the availability of both software and hardware, specifically the launch of a commercially available acquisition device and freely available high-profile game development engines. In this Viewpoint, we share our perspective on the current trends and progress of serious games for prosthetic training

Concussion in para sport:the first position statement of the Concussion in Para Sport (CIPS) Group

Concussion is a frequent injury in many sports and is also common in para athletes. However, there is a paucity of concussion research related to para sport, and prior International Concussion in Sport (CIS) consensus papers have not substantively addressed this population. To remedy this and to improve concussion care provided to para athletes, the concussion in para sport (CIPS) multidisciplinary expert group was created. This group analysed and discussed in-depth para athlete-specific issues within the established key clinical domains of the current (2017) consensus statement on CIS. Due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the group held all meetings by video conferencing. The existing Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 5 (SCAT5) for the immediate on-field and office-based off-field assessment of concussion was evaluated as part of this process, to identify any para athlete-specific concerns. Regular preparticipation and periodic health examinations are essential to determine a baseline reference point for concussion symptoms but pose additional challenges for the interpreting clinician. Further considerations for concussion management for the para athlete are required within the remove, rest, reconsider and refer consensus statement framework. Considering return to sport (RTS), the 2017 CIS consensus statement has limitations when considering the RTS of the para athlete. Case-by-case decision making related to RTS following concussion is imperative for para athletes. Additional challenges exist for the evaluation and management of concussion in para athletes. There is a need for greater understanding of existing knowledge gaps and attitudes towards concussion among athlete medical staff, coaches and para athletes. Future research should investigate the use and performance of common assessment tools in the para athlete population to better guide their clinical application and inform potential modifications. Concussion prevention strategies and sport-specific rule changes, such as in Para Alpine Skiing and Cerebral Palsy Football, also should be carefully considered to reduce the occurrence of concussion in para athletes