Introduction: Sensor-feedback systems can be used to support people after stroke during independent practice of gait. The main aim of the study was to describe the user-centred approach to (re)design the user interface of the sensor feedback system “Stappy” for people after stroke, and share the deliverables and key observations from this process. Methods: The user-centred approach was structured around four phases (the discovery, definition, development and delivery phase) which were fundamental to the design process. Fifteen participants with cognitive and/or physical limitations participated (10 women, 2/3 older than 65). Prototypes were evaluated in multiple test rounds, consisting of 2–7 individual test sessions. Results: Seven deliverables were created: a list of design requirements, a personae, a user flow, a low-, medium- and high-fidelity prototype and the character “Stappy”. The first six deliverables were necessary tools to design the user interface, whereas the character was a solution resulting from this design process. Key observations related to “readability and contrast of visual information”, “understanding and remembering information”, “physical limitations” were confirmed by and “empathy” was additionally derived from the design process. Conclusions: The study offers a structured methodology resulting in deliverables and key observations, which can be used to (re)design meaningful user interfaces for people after stroke. Additionally, the study provides a technique that may promote “empathy” through the creation of the character Stappy. The description may provide guidance for health care professionals, researchers or designers in future user interface design projects in which existing products are redesigned for people after stroke.
Motor learning is particularly challenging in neurological rehabilitation: patients who suffer from neurological diseases experience both physical limitations and difficulties of cognition and communication that affect and/or complicate the motor learning process. Therapists (e.g.,, physiotherapists and occupational therapists) who work in neurorehabilitation are therefore continuously searching for the best way to facilitate patients during these intensive learning processes. To support therapists in the application of motor learning, a framework was developed, integrating knowledge from the literature and the opinions and experiences of international experts. This article presents the framework, illustrated by cases from daily practice. The framework may assist therapists working in neurorehabilitation in making choices, implementing motor learning in routine practice, and supporting communication of knowledge and experiences about motor learning with colleagues and students. The article discusses the framework and offers suggestions and conditions given for its use in daily practice.
Movement is an essential part of our lives. Throughout our lifetime, we acquire many different motor skills that are necessary to take care of ourselves (e.g., eating, dressing), to work (e.g., typing, using tools, care for others) and to pursue our hobbies (e.g., running, dancing, painting). However, as a consequence of aging, trauma or chronic disease, motor skills may deteriorate or become “lost”. Learning, relearning, and improving motor skills may then be essential to maintain or regain independence. There are many different ways in which the process of learning a motor skill can be shaped in practice. The conceptual basis for this thesis was the broad distinction between implicit and explicit forms of motor learning. Physiotherapists and occupational therapists are specialized to provide therapy that is tailored to facilitate the process of motor learning of patients with a wide range of pathologies. In addition to motor impairments, patients suffering from neurological disorders often also experience problems with cognition and communication. These problems may hinder the process of learning at a didactic level, and make motor learning especially challenging for those with neurological disorders. This thesis focused on the theory and application of motor learning during rehabilitation of patients with neurological disorders. The overall aim of this thesis was to provide therapists in neurological rehabilitation with knowledge and tools to support the justified and tailored use of motor learning in daily clinical practice. The thesis is divided into two parts. The aim of the first part (Chapters 2‐5) was to develop a theoretical basis to apply motor learning in clinical practice, using the implicit‐explicit distinction as a conceptual basis. Results of this first part were used to develop a framework for the application of motor learning within neurological rehabilitation (Chapter 6). Afterwards, in the second part, strategies identified in first part were tested for feasibility and potential effects in people with stroke (Chapters 7 and 8). Chapters 5-8 are non-final versions of an article published in final form in: Chapter 5: Kleynen M, Moser A, Haarsma FA, Beurskens AJ, Braun SM. Physiotherapists use a great variety of motor learning options in neurological rehabilitation, from which they choose through an iterative process: a retrospective think-aloud study. Disabil Rehabil. 2017 Aug;39(17):1729-1737. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2016.1207111. Chapter 6: Kleynen M, Beurskens A, Olijve H, Kamphuis J, Braun S. Application of motor learning in neurorehabilitation: a framework for health-care professionals. Physiother Theory Pract. 2018 Jun 19:1-20. doi: 10.1080/09593985.2018.1483987 Chapter 7: Kleynen M, Wilson MR, Jie LJ, te Lintel Hekkert F, Goodwin VA, Braun SM. Exploring the utility of analogies in motor learning after stroke: a feasibility study. Int J Rehabil Res. 2014 Sep;37(3):277-80. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000058. Chapter 8: Kleynen M, Jie LJ, Theunissen K, Rasquin SM, Masters RS, Meijer K, Beurskens AJ, Braun SM. The immediate influence of implicit motor learning strategies on spatiotemporal gait parameters in stroke patients: a randomized within-subjects design. Clin Rehabil. 2019 Apr;33(4):619-630. doi: 10.1177/0269215518816359.
