Child and parent perceptions of acceptability and therapeutic value of a socially assistive robot used during pediatric rehabilitation

References

• van Hedel HJA. Aurich T. Clinical application of rehabilitation technologies in children undergoing neurorehabilitation. In: Reinkensmeyer DJ, Dietz V, editors. Neurorehabilitation technology. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 283–308.
   Google Scholar
• Andrade AO, Pereira AA, Walter S, et al. Bridging the gap between robotic technology and health care. Biomed Signal Process Control. 2014;10:65–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feil-Seifer D, Mataric MJ, editors. Defining socially assistive robotics. 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, 2005. ICORR 2005; 28 June 2005–1 July 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Carr JH, Shepherd RB. Part one: Introduction: adaptation, training and measurement. Neurological rehabilitation. Optimizing motor performance. Oxford: Butterworth Heinmann; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Lambert TE, Harvey LA, Avdalis C, et al. An app with remote support achieves better adherence to home exercise programs than paper handouts in people with musculoskeletal conditions: a randomised trial. J Physiother. 2017;63:161–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malik NA, Hanapiah FA, Abdul Rahman RA, et al. Emergence of socially assistive robotics in rehabilitation for children with cerebral palsy: a review. IJARS. 2016;13:135.
   Google Scholar
• SoftBank Robotics. Find out more about NAO: SoftBank Robotics; 2017 [cited 2017 May 20]. Available from: https://www.ald.softbankrobotics.com/en/cool-robots/nao/find-out-more-about-nao
   Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Garcia-Vergara S, Howard AM. Effect of feedback from a socially interactive humanoid robot on reaching kinematics in children with and without cerebral palsy: a pilot study. Dev Neurorehabil. 2017;21(1):1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suárez Mejías C, Echevarría C, Nuñez P, et al., editors. Ursus: a robotic assistant for training of children with motor impairments. Converging clinical and engineering research on neurorehabilitation. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Pulido JC, González JC, Suárez-Mejías C, et al. Evaluating the child–robot interaction of the NAOTherapist platform in pediatric rehabilitation. Int J of Soc Robotics. 2017;9:343–358.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brisben AJ, Safos CS, Lockerd AD, et al. The CosmoBot(TM) system: evaluating its usability in therapy sessions with children diagnosed with cerebral palsy. 2005 [cited 2018 Mar 10]: [http://web.mit.edu/zoz/Public/AnthroTronix-ROMAN2005.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vircikova M, Sincak P, Kim J-H, et al. Experience with the children-humanoid interaction in rehabilitation therapy for spinal disorders. Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 2012: An Edition of the Presented Papers from the 1st International Conference on Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications, Gwangju, Korea. 2013:347–357.
   Google Scholar
• Malik NA, Yussof H, Hanapiah FA. Interactive scenario development of robot-assisted therapy for cerebral palsy: a face validation survey. Procedia Comput Sci. 2017;105:322–327.
   Google Scholar
• Fridin M, Belokopytov M. Robotics agent coacher for CP motor function (RAC CP Fun). Robotica. 2014;32:1265–1279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gnjatović M, Tasevski J, Mišković D, et al., editors. Pilot corpus of child-robot interaction in therapeutic settings. 8th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications; 2017 11–14 Sep. 2017; Debrecen, Hungary.
   Google Scholar
• Chen CC, Bode RK. Factors influencing therapists decision-making in the acceptance of new technology devices in stroke rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;90:415–425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood KC, Lathan CE, Kaufman KR. Feasibility of gestural feedback treatment for upper extremity movement in children with cerebral palsy. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2013;21:300–305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malik NA, Yussof H, Hanapiah FA. Development of imitation learning through physical therapy using a humanoid robot. Procedia Comput Sci. 2014;42:191–197.
   Google Scholar
• Kozyavkin V, Kachmar O, Ablikova I. Humanoid social robots in the rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare; Oldenburg, Germany: Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering; 2014. p. 430–431.
   Google Scholar
• van den Heuvel R, Lexis M, de Witte L. Introducing ZORA to children with severe physical disabilities. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;242:510–516.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martí Carrillo F, Butchart J, Knight S, et al. Adapting a general-purpose social robot for paediatric rehabilitation through in situ design. ACM Trans Hum-Robot Interact. 2018;7:1–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidecker MJC, Paneth N, Rosenbaum PL, et al. Developing and validating the communication function classification system for individuals with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011;53:704–710.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Health AGDo. Modified Monash Model Australia: Commonwealth of Australia; 2018 [updated 12 June 2018; cited 2019 Feb 16]. Available from: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/modified-monash-model
   Google Scholar
• Teachman G, Gibson BE. Children and youth with disabilities: innovative methods for single qualitative interviews. Qual Health Res. 2013;23:264–274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirk S. Methodological and ethical issues in conducting qualitative research with children and young people: a literature review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2007;44:1250–1260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaye LK, Malone SA, Wall HJ. Emojis: insights, affordances, and possibilities for psychological science. Trends Cogn Sci. 2017;21:66–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fossey E, Harvey C, McDermott F, et al. Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2002;36:717–732.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Ritchie J, Zwi A, Blignault I, et al. Insider-outsider positions in health-development research: reflections for practice. Dev Pract. 2009;19:106–112.
   Google Scholar
• Wilk P, Clark AF, Maltby A, et al. Exploring the effect of parental influence on children's physical activity: the mediating role of children's perceptions of parental support. Prev Med. 2018;106:79–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CanChild. GMCFS-E&R: Gross motor function classification system expanded and revised. Ontario, Canada: McMaster University; 2019 [cited 2019 Apr 18]. Available from: https://canchild.ca/en/resources/42-gross-motor-function-classification-system-expanded-revised-gmfcs-e-r
   Google Scholar
• Eliasson AC, Krumlinde-Sundholm L, Rosblad B, et al. The Manual Ability Classification System (MACS) for children with cerebral palsy: scale development and evidence of validity and reliability. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006;48:549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fasola J, Mataric MJ. Using socially assistive human robot interaction to motivate physical exercise for older adults. Proc IEEE. 2012;100:2512–2526.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Chiarello LA, Thompson L, et al. Development of an observational measure of therapy engagement for pediatric rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;41(1):86–97. DOI:10.1080/09638288.2017.1375031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birt L, Pfeil M, MacGregor A, et al. Adherence to home physiotherapy treatment in children and young people with joint hypermobility: a qualitative report of family perspectives on acceptability and efficacy. Musculoskelet Care. 2014;12:56–61.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dew A, Bulkeley K, Veitch C, et al. Addressing the barriers to accessing therapy services in rural and remote areas. Disabil Rehabil. 2013;35:1564–1570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorgon E. Caregiver-provided physical therapy home programs for children with motor delay: a scoping review. Phys Ther. 2018;98:480–493.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis K, Gavidia-Payne S. The impact of child, family, and professional support characteristics on the quality of life in families of young children with disabilities. J Intellect Dev Dis. 2009;34:153–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Libin AV, Libin EV. Person-robot interactions from the robopsychologists' point of view: the robotic psychology and robotherapy approach. Proc IEEE. 2004;92:1789–1803.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kruijsen-Terpstra AJA, Ketelaar M, Boeije H, et al. Parents' experiences with physical and occupational therapy for their young child with cerebral palsy: a mixed studies review. Child Care Health Dev. 2014;40:787–796.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum P, King S, Law M, et al. Family-centred service. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 1998;18:1–20.
   Google Scholar