The pilot study was performed to evaluate the usability, credibility and expectancy of an intelligent, activity-based client-centred training system (i-ACT), and the motivation towards its use in neurological rehabilitation over a short period of time.
A mixed-method study was performed in four rehabilitation centres in Belgium. An homogenous convenience sample was recruited among persons with central nervous system disorders. Participants received 3 x 45 minutes of training with the i-ACT system during six weeks, additional to conventional care. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was used to collect and evaluate patients' individual goals towards rehabilitation. These goals were discussed with the therapists before implementing movements and exercises for each patient in the i-ACT system. The following demographic data were obtained from the medical files: age, gender, and diagnosis. Outcomes measures were collected at baseline (T0), after 2 (T1), 4 (T2) and 6 (T3) weeks of training and at 9 weeks follow-up (T4). The primary outcome measures were the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI), the System Usability Scale (SUS), Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ), the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), and Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT). The secondary measures were the Manual Ability Measure-36 (MAM-36), Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS), Trunk Impairment Scale (TIS), and Active Range of Motion (AROM). After final training with i-ACT, a semi-structured interview was performed to gather more information about the participants' perception towards i-ACT. For quantitative data, within-group differences of all the assessments were analysed using Friedman's ANOVA and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Alpha was set at 0.05; No Bonferroni correction was applied as it is not compulsory in an exploratory study and furthermore, results are regarded as hypothesis for further investigations. The qualitative data was collected and recorded with a voice recorder. No specific analysis was used as the interview collected data to support or oppose the findings of the quantitative data.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
25
3 x 45min of training with i-ACT system
Participants, patients and therapists, were invited to a semi-structured interview after training period.
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory
Motivation towards a therapy, in this i-ACT
Time frame: 2 weeks
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory
Motivation towards a therapy, in this i-ACT
Time frame: 4 weeks
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory
Motivation towards a therapy, in this i-ACT
Time frame: 6 weeks
Intrinsic Motivation Inventory
Motivation towards a therapy, in this i-ACT
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)
System Usability Scale
Usability of a system, in this i-ACT. Range of scores from 0 (negative) to 100 (positive).
Time frame: 2 weeks
System Usability Scale
Usability of a system, in this i-ACT. Range of scores from 0 (negative) to 100 (positive).
Time frame: 4 weeks
System Usability Scale
Usability of a system, in this i-ACT. Range of scores from 0 (negative) to 100 (positive).
Time frame: 6 weeks
System Usability Scale
Usability of a system, in this i-ACT. Range of scores from 0 (negative) to 100 (positive).
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)
Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire
Credibility and expectancy of a training system, in this i-ACT. The range of scores on each subscale (i.e. credibility and expectancy) is 27.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire
Credibility and expectancy of a training system, in this i-ACT. The range of scores on each subscale (i.e. credibility and expectancy) is 27.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire
Credibility and expectancy of a training system, in this i-ACT. The range of scores on each subscale (i.e. credibility and expectancy) is 27.
Time frame: 6 weeks
Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire
Credibility and expectancy of a training system, in this i-ACT. The range of scores on each subscale (i.e. credibility and expectancy) is 27.
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)
Canadian Occupational Performance Measure
By means of a semi-structured interview, participants are asked to identify their 5 main goals in self-care, productivity and/or leisure. Scores range from 0 to 10 (best score) in each defined goal.
Time frame: Baseline
Canadian Occupational Performance Measure
By means of a semi-structured interview, participants are asked to identify their 5 main goals in self-care, productivity and/or leisure. Scores range from 0 to 10 (best score) in each defined goal.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Canadian Occupational Performance Measure
By means of a semi-structured interview, participants are asked to identify their 5 main goals in self-care, productivity and/or leisure. Scores range from 0 to 10 (best score) in each defined goal.
Time frame: 6 weeks
Canadian Occupational Performance Measure
By means of a semi-structured interview, participants are asked to identify their 5 main goals in self-care, productivity and/or leisure. Scores range from 0 to 10 (best score) in each defined goal.
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)
Wolf Motor Function Test
Arm-hand functioning. The test contains 17 items and are scored from 0 (not able to perform tesk) to 5 (normal performance).
Time frame: Baseline
Wolf Motor Function Test
Arm-hand functioning. The test contains 17 items and are scored from 0 (not able to perform tesk) to 5 (normal performance).
Time frame: 2 weeks
Wolf Motor Function Test
Arm-hand functioning. The test contains 17 items and are scored from 0 (not able to perform tesk) to 5 (normal performance).
Time frame: 4 weeks
Wolf Motor Function Test
Arm-hand functioning. The test contains 17 items and are scored from 0 (not able to perform tesk) to 5 (normal performance).
Time frame: 6 weeks
Wolf Motor Function Test
Arm-hand functioning. The test contains 17 items and are scored from 0 (not able to perform tesk) to 5 (normal performance).
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)
Manual Ability Measure-36
Manual ability. Scores range from 0 (impossible to perform) to 4 (easy to perform)
Time frame: Baseline
Manual Ability Measure-36
Manual ability. Scores range from 0 (impossible to perform) to 4 (easy to perform)
Time frame: 2 weeks
Manual Ability Measure-36
Manual ability. Scores range from 0 (impossible to perform) to 4 (easy to perform)
Time frame: 4 Weeks
Manual Ability Measure-36
Manual ability. Scores range from 0 (impossible to perform) to 4 (easy to perform)
Time frame: 6 weeks
Manual Ability Measure-36
Manual ability. Scores range from 0 (impossible to perform) to 4 (easy to perform)
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)
Modified Fatigue Impact Scale
Fatigue. Twenty-one items ar scored on a 5-point Likert scale (range from 0, never, to 4, almost always). The higher the score the most impact fatigue has on the life of the person. .
Time frame: Baseline
Modified Fatigue Impact Scale
Fatigue. Twenty-one items ar scored on a 5-point Likert scale (range from 0, never, to 4, almost always). The higher the score the most impact fatigue has on the life of the person. .
Time frame: 2 weeks
Modified Fatigue Impact Scale
Fatigue. Twenty-one items ar scored on a 5-point Likert scale (range from 0, never, to 4, almost always). The higher the score the most impact fatigue has on the life of the person. .
Time frame: 4 weeks
Modified Fatigue Impact Scale
Fatigue. Twenty-one items ar scored on a 5-point Likert scale (range from 0, never, to 4, almost always). The higher the score the most impact fatigue has on the life of the person. .
Time frame: 6 weeks
Modified Fatigue Impact Scale
Fatigue. Twenty-one items ar scored on a 5-point Likert scale (range from 0, never, to 4, almost always). The higher the score the most impact fatigue has on the life of the person. .
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)
Trunk Impairment Scale
Trunk impairment. Scores range from 0 (minimum) to 23. The higher the score the less motor impairment is present in the trunk.
Time frame: Baseline
Trunk Impairment Scale
Trunk impairment. Scores range from 0 (minimum) to 23. The higher the score the less motor impairment is present in the trunk.
Time frame: 2 weeks
Trunk Impairment Scale
Trunk impairment. Scores range from 0 (minimum) to 23. The higher the score the less motor impairment is present in the trunk.
Time frame: 4 weeks
Trunk Impairment Scale
Trunk impairment. Scores range from 0 (minimum) to 23. The higher the score the less motor impairment is present in the trunk.
Time frame: 6 weeks
Trunk Impairment Scale
Trunk impairment. Scores range from 0 (minimum) to 23. The higher the score the less motor impairment is present in the trunk.
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)
Active Range of Motion
Active range of motion
Time frame: Baseline
Active Range of Motion
Active range of motion
Time frame: 2 weeks
Active Range of Motion
Active range of motion
Time frame: 4 weeks
Active Range of Motion
Active range of motion
Time frame: 6 weeks
Active Range of Motion
Active range of motion
Time frame: 12 weeks (i.e. 6 weeks follow-up)