Proposed Topic (Most preferred): :
Research and Innovations (new projects / technology / innovations / service models)
Proposed Topic (Second preferred): :
Clinical Safety and Quality Service III (Projects aiming at quality service to patients and their carers)
Authors (including presenting author) :
Ng SLA(1), Wong CKC(1), Wong FYA(1), Chan CNS(1)
Affiliation :
(1)Physiotherapy Department, MacLehose Medical Rehabilitation Centre
Introduction :
Two exoskeletons from different manufacturers, Ekso NR and Indego, are in usage for rehabilitation with patients with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) and spinal dysfunctions in Physiotherapy Department, MacLehose Medical Rehabilitation Centre (MMRC). According to user manual and recommendations from manufacturer, although similar group of patients, i.e. SCI C7 level or below, and American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) classification A to D can be served, there are different operating methods such as control interface and donning / doffing between two exoskeleton systems. Concern is raised that which exoskeleton system is perceived to have better usability.
Objectives :
To compare the usability, consistency and complexity of two exoskeleton systems for rehabilitating patients with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) and spinal dysfunctions by a valid questionnaire-based measure.
Methodology :
SUS (System Usability Scale) is a widely used questionnaire-based method for assessing the usability of a system. It consists of a set of 10 statements, and participants are asked to rate their agreement with each statement on a scale of 1 to 5. The SUS scores can range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better usability. Three physiotherapists who are familiar with two exoskeletons were administered to complete the SUS questionnaire to each system, then compare the SUS scores for each system. Average SUS scores of the two systems from our three physiotherapists was also compared to determine which one is perceived to have better usability. The SUS scores from three physiotherapists for EksoNR and Indego respectively: User A: 60, 50; User B: 52.5, 50; User C: 67.5, 42.5; and average scores of two systems are 60 and 47.5 respectively.
Result & Outcome :
It may suggest that Ekso NR is perceived to have better usability, as the scoring of Ekso NR is higher than that of Indego from all three physiotherapists, in terms of comprehensiveness and consistency of the systems. But the average scores for both systems are below the suggested cut-off average mark of 68 (Sauro, J., 2011), likely due to their high complexity and low learnability. Comments from our physiotherapists include “Not a system that quick to learn and easy to use”, “Technical support is recommended”. Besides recruiting larger sample size of users, further exploring relevant assessment including qualitative measures for rehabilitative equipment is also recommended to gather more detailed feedback on specific aspects of usability, such as, overall users’ satisfaction, comfort, ease of donning/doffing and control interface.
