Objectives: Exoskeletons are electromechanical devices that are worn by a human operator to increase their physical performance. Several exoskeletons have been developed to restore functional movements, such as walking, for those with paralysis due to neurological impairment. However, existing exoskeletons have limitations with respect to affordability, size, weight, speed, and efficiency, which may reduce their functional application. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review is to collect and narratively synthesize the perspectives of users of exoskeleton technology.Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted across several healthcare related online databases.Results: A total of 4,619 articles were identified, of which 51 were selected for full review. Only three studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, one showed an incongruence between users’ expectations and experiences of device use; another reported perspectives on potential rather than actual device use, ranking design features in order of perceived importance; and the other reported ratings of ease of device use in training.Conclusions: The heterogeneity of studies included within this review, leave the authors unable to suggest consensus as to user perspectives of exoskeleton technology. However, it is apparent that users are able to suggest priorities for exoskeleton design and that users’ perspectives of exoskeleton technology might change in response to experience of use. The authors, therefore, suggest that exoskeleton design should be an iterative process, whereby user perspectives are sought, incorporated and refined by tangible experience, to ensure that devices developed are acceptable to and usable by the populations they seek to re-enable.

Background: Understanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper- and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring, with particular focus on low-resource settings.Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis users during daily-living.Results: Sixty lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lower-limb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm.Conclusions: Activity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user’s requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.

To counter the many disadvantages of prolonged wheelchair use, patients with spinal cord injuries (SCI) are beginning to turn towards robotic exoskeletons. However, we are currently unaware of the magnitude and distribution of forces acting between the user and the exoskeleton. This is a critical issue, as SCI patients have an increased susceptibility to skin lesions and pressure ulcer development. Therefore, we developed a real-time force measuring apparatus, which was placed at the physical human-robot interface (pHRI) of a lower limb robotic exoskeleton. Experiments captured the dynamics of these interaction forces whilst the participants performed a range of typical stepping actions. Our results indicate that peak forces occurred at the anterior aspect of both the left and right legs, areas that are particularly prone to pressure ulcer development. A significant difference was also found between the average force experienced at the anterior and posterior sensors of the right thigh during the swing phase for different movement primitives. These results call for the integration of instrumented straps as standard in lower limb exoskeletons. They also highlight the potential of such straps to be used as an alternative/complementary interface for the high-level control of lower limb exoskeletons in some patient groups.

Purpose: This paper explores the accessibility barriers faced by neurodivergent individuals regarding the use of Extended Reality (XR) technologies and the difficulties faced by developers in creating neurodivergent inclusive XR experiences.Design/methodology/approach: The authors carried out a survey with neurodivergent participants, and a series of semi-structured interviews with neurodivergent adults and XR developers.Findings: Neurodivergent individuals experience sensory overload when using XR technologies; these negative experiences are exacerbated by excessive multisensory stimulation. Allowing for the customization of sensory settings was seen as the only way to potentially limit negative experiences. The authors found that XR developers lacked awareness of accessibility requirements and struggled to integrate them in current software development practices.Social implications: Accessibility understanding regarding neurodivergence is increasingly available and the time has come to bring computing and information services within the reach of all neurodivergent individuals. The power in the design of XR, which is crucial, is decentralized from neurotypical XR developing practices to avoid artificial barriers that decrease the quality of life.Originality/value: There is a lack of studies exploring how neurodivergent individuals experience XR considering their different sensory processing patterns. There is also no research exploring XR developers' awareness of accessibility needs of neurodivergent individuals. This paper presents an account of the challenges faced by neurodivergent XR users, the difficulties faced by XR developers to integrate neurodivergent accessibility requirements, and proposes specific strategies to overcome challenges.

The journal is published for the purpose of advancing scholarship in disability studies and rehabilitation sciences in a uniquely African context. Widely read by scholars, professionals and students, it encourages scholarly exchange between all disciplines and academics from low, middle and high-income countries to work towards the improvement of human development and its practices across the continent.

It is essential to understand the strategies and processes which are deployed currently across the Assistive Technology (AT) space toward measuring innovation. The main aim of this paper is to identify functional innovation strategies and processes which are being or can be deployed in the AT space to increase access to AT globally. We conducted a scoping review of innovation strategies and processes in peer-reviewed literature databases and complemented this by identifying case studies demonstrating innovation strategies. The review includes WHO world region, publication year, AT type and a sector analysis against the Systems-Market for Assistive and Related Technologies Framework. We analyzed the case studies and interviews using thematic analysis. We included 91 papers out of 3,127 after review along with 72 case studies. Our results showed that product innovations were more prevalent than provision or supply innovations across papers and case studies. Case studies yielded two themes: open innovation (OI); radical and disruptive innovation. Financial instruments which encourage OI are needed and we recommend pursuing OI for AT innovation. Embedding AT within larger societal missions will be key to success governments and investors need to understand what AT is and their translational socioeconomic value.