User-centered design and development of TWIN-Acta: A novel control suite of the TWIN lower limb exoskeleton for the rehabilitation of persons post-stroke

Application of human-centered design principles to wearable exoskeletons: a systematic review

Purpose of the article: As technologies continue to advance, designing wearable exoskeletons that are comfortable, safe, reliable, and engaging for users is an arduous task. The integration of HCD principles in exoskeleton development significantly contributes to ensuring that the product meets the needs and preferences of users. This study systematically reviews the application of human-centred design (HCD) principles in the development of wearable exoskeletons.

Methodology: It synthesizes existing literature, identifies key HCD concepts and assesses their impact on exoskeleton usability, comfort, and safety. The findings of the study revealed a moderate application of HCD in many of the studies; however, the concepts were found to play a crucial role in enhancing the usability, safety, and comfort of wearable exoskeleton technology implementation. Challenges revealed in the study include limited stakeholder involvement, a lack of standardized evaluation metrics, non-consideration of ethical, legal, and social issues, and a lack of studies on the potential adverse effects of exoskeleton use. Besides identifying the challenges faced in integrating HCD principles into exoskeleton development, the study also proposed pragmatic approaches to overcome them.

Results: The study underscores the significance of incorporating human-centred design principles in the design and development of wearable exoskeletons. This has implications for industry, rehabilitation, health, and agriculture to churn out positive outcomes. The research contributes to the expanding literature on wearable exoskeletons and HCD, offering valuable insights into the advancement of this technology in various domains and suggesting areas for future studies to address identified gaps.

Co-design for stroke intervention development: Results of a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Co-design methodology seeks to actively engage end-users in developing interventions. It is increasingly used to design stroke interventions; however, limited guidance exists, particularly with/for individuals with stroke who have diverse cognitive, physical and functional abilities. Thus, we describe 1) the extent of existing research that has used co-design for stroke intervention development and 2) how co-design has been used to develop stroke interventions among studies that explicitly used co-design, including the rationale, types of co-designed stroke interventions, participants involved, research methodologies/approaches, methods of incorporating end-users in the research, co-design limitations, challenges and potential strategies reported by researchers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A scoping review informed by Joanna Briggs Institute and Arksey & O'Malley methodology was conducted by searching nine databases on December 21, 2022, to locate English-language literature that used co-design to develop a stroke intervention. Additional data sources were identified through a hand search. Data sources were de-duplicated, and two research team members reviewed their titles, abstracts and full text to ensure they met the inclusion criteria. Data relating to the research objectives were extracted, analyzed, and reported numerically and descriptively.

RESULTS

Data sources used co-design for stroke intervention development with (n = 89) and without (n = 139) explicitly using the term 'co-design.' Among studies explicitly using co-design, it was commonly used to understand end-user needs and generate new ideas. Many co-designed interventions were technology-based (65%), and 48% were for physical rehabilitation or activity-based. Co-design was commonly conducted with multiple participants (82%; e.g., individuals with stroke, family members/caregivers and clinicians) and used various methods to engage end-users, including focus groups and workshops. Limitations, challenges and potential strategies for recruitment, participant-engagement, contextual and logistical and ethics of co-designed interventions were described.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the increasing popularity of co-design as a methodology for developing stroke interventions internationally, these findings can inform future co-designed studies.