Patient and therapist experiences of using affordable feedback-based technology in rehabilitation: a qualitative study nested in a randomized controlled trial
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore how technologies are used and experienced in rehabilitation. DESIGN: A qualitative study using a grounded theory approach within a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of tailored, affordable technologies to improve mobility and physical activity. SETTINGS: Aged care and neurological rehabilitation wards with community follow-up. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty patients undergoing rehabilitation and randomized to the experimental arm of a trial (mean age 64 years (SD 23)) were recruited for interviews, plus 11 physiotherapists involved in technology prescription as part of the trial. METHOD: Two interviews per patient (one in hospital, one post-discharge) and four focus groups with physiotherapists were conducted. Transcribed data were coded and synthesized. Memo-writing and constant comparison methods guided data analysis. RESULTS: A process of patient engagement with technology involving two stages: (1) initial patient engagement and (2) maintaining patient engagement was identified. Therapists used a series of steps and strategies to gain and maintain patient engagement. A positive first experience and continued input into patient programmes was needed. The level of patient engagement was not consistent across the duration of the trial, increasing or decreasing due to changes in the technologies prescribed or setting of use. Two conditions were key to optimizing patient engagement: sufficient support and perceived benefit from using technology. CONCLUSIONS: Patients can engage with technology during rehabilitation when prescription is tailored by a therapist. Perceiving benefit from using technology, in addition to receiving the right support to enable use appears to influence the level of patient engagement.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Hamilton et al reported a sample where 60% had a neurological primary diagnosis, including stroke, alongside significant motor deficits.
“Hamilton et al [25] reported a sample where 60% had a neurological primary diagnosis, including stroke, alongside significant motor deficits.”
Cites
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 · Cited by 88,282 · see citing works
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483 · see citing works
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 · Cited by 42,509 · see citing works
Guralnik, J. M., Simonsick, E. M., Ferrucci, L., Glynn, R. J., Berkman, L. F., Blazer, D. G., Scherr, P. A., & Wallace, R. B. (1994) · Journal of Gerontology · doi:10.1093/geronj/49.2.m85 · Cited by 9,792 · see citing works
Lewis, G. N., & Rosie, J. A. (2012) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.3109/09638288.2012.670036 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Is the Nintendo Wii Fit really acceptable to older people?: a discrete choice experiment
Laver, K., Ratcliffe, J., George, S., Burgess, L., & Crotty, M. (2011) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/1471-2318-11-64 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
Hassett, L. M., van den Berg, M., Lindley, R. I., Crotty, M., McCluskey, A., van der Ploeg, H. P., Smith, S., Schurr, K., Killington, M., Bongers, B., et al. (2016) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012074 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Self-citationWingham, J., Adie, K., Turner, D., Schofield, C., & Pritchard, C. W. (2014) · Clinical Rehabilitation · doi:10.1177/0269215514542638 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Forsberg, A., Nilsagård, Y. E., & Boström, K. (2014) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.3109/09638288.2014.918196 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Chen, M., Huang, L., Lee, C., Hsieh, C., Lin, Y.-C., Liu, H.-C., Chen, M.-I., & Lu, W.-S. (2014) · Clinical Rehabilitation · doi:10.1177/0269215514554115 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Facilitation matters : A framework for instructor-led serious gaming
Taylor, A.-S. A. (2014) · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Laver, K., Ratcliffe, J., George, S., Lester, L. H., & Crotty, M. (2012) · Australian Occupational Therapy Journal · doi:10.1111/1440-1630.12018 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Suso-Martí, L., La Touche, R., Herranz-Gómez, A., Angulo-Díaz-Parreño, S., Paris-Alemany, A., & Cuenca-Martínez, F. (2021) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzab075 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
Harris, P., & Maine, I. (2026) · JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies · doi:10.2196/86915 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“Despite a comprehensive search, only 2 included studies specifically addressed older stroke survivors: a qualitative study of 15 survivors and a systematic review incorporating one qualitative stroke study and 5 qualitative proxy population studies [25,26].”
Influential
- Authors
- Hamilton, C., McCluskey, A., Hassett, L., Killington, M., & Lovarini, M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Flinders University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Hamilton, Caitlin
- Venue
- Clinical Rehabilitation
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2018-04-26
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1258-1270
- ISSN
- 0269-2155 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0873
- OpenAlex
- W2799494620
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 2.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1063751)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Keywords
- patient engagement, physiotherapy, rehabilitation technology, therapist strategies, perceived benefits, mobility (physical function), physical activity, elderly care, neurorehabilitation, post-discharge follow-up
- MeSH terms
- Wearable Electronic Devices, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attitude of Health Personnel, Female, Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Participation, Video Games, Young Adult, Physical Therapists, Grounded Theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
