From Pain to Design Recommendations for Assistive Robotics
Pages 428 - 430
Abstract
Assistive technologies are vital for individuals with physical limitations, and understanding the diverse impact of physical pain is crucial for designing effective assistive robotic solutions. Through an iterative study, we aim to develop comprehensive design recommendations that cover personalization, concealment, compatibility, ease of use, preventive measures, skin-friendliness, affordability, adaptability, and multimodal features. These recommendations prioritize user experience and acceptance, ultimately contributing to innovative and user-centric assistive robotic technologies.
References
[1]
C. A. A. Sharma, A. S. K. Sai Vishnu Kumar, A. Prasad, R. Begum, G. S. Sharvani, and A. E. Manjunath. 2018. Multifaceted bio-medical applications of exoskeleton: A review. In 2018 2nd International Conference on Inventive Systems and Control (ICISC). 11–15. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICISC.2018.8399053 Journal Abbreviation: 2018 2nd International Conference on Inventive Systems and Control (ICISC).
[2]
María del Río Carral, Vanlisa Bourqui, Noémie Vuilleumier, Amalric Ortieb, and M. Bouri. 2021. Are Functional Measures Sufficient to Capture Acceptance? A Qualitative Study on Lower Limb Exoskeleton Use for Older People. International Journal of Social Robotics 14 (2021), 603 – 616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-021-00810-9
[3]
Ke Chen. 2018. Assistive Technology and Emotions of Older People – Adopting a Positive and Integrated Design Approach. In Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Acceptance, Communication and Participation, Jia Zhou and Gavriel Salvendy (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 21–29.
[4]
Alireza Golgouneh, Eric Beaudette, Heidi Woelfle, Bai Li, Niharikha Subash, Amanda J. Redhouse, Mark Jones, Tom Martin, Michele A. Lobo, Brad Holschuh, and Lucy E. Dunne. 2021. Design of a Hybrid SMA-Pneumatic Based Wearable Upper Limb Exoskeleton. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers(ISWC ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1145/3460421.3478838 event-place: Virtual, USA.
[5]
K. Yamazaki, R. Ueda, S. Nozawa, Y. Mori, T. Maki, N. Hatao, K. Okada, and M. Inaba. 2010. System integration of a daily assistive robot and its application to tidying and cleaning rooms. In 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 1365–1371. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2010.5653614 Journal Abbreviation: 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.
[6]
K. Yamazaki, Y. Watanabe, K. Nagahama, K. Okada, and M. Inaba. 2010. Recognition and manipulation integration for a daily assistive robot working on kitchen environments. In 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics. 196–201. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBIO.2010.5723326 Journal Abbreviation: 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics.
[7]
Kiwan Han, J. Lee, and W. -K. Song. 2013. Application scenarios for assistive robots based on in-depth focus group interviews and clinical expert meetings. In IEEE ISR 2013. 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISR.2013.6695679 Journal Abbreviation: IEEE ISR 2013.
[8]
Roberto J. López-Sastre, Marcos Baptista-Ríos, Francisco J. Acevedo-Rodríguez, Soraya Pacheco-da Costa, Saturnino Maldonado-Bascón, and Sergio Lafuente-Arroyo. 2021. A Low-Cost Assistive Robot for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders to Aid in Daily Living Activities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 8 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18083974
[9]
M. Shoaib, E. Asadi, J. Cheong, and A. Bab-Hadiashar. 2021. Cable Driven Rehabilitation Robots: Comparison of Applications and Control Strategies. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 110396–110420. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3102107
[10]
Stephen J. Macdonald and John Clayton. 2013. Back to the future, disability and the digital divide. Disability & Society 28, 5 (July 2013), 702–718. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.732538 Publisher: Routledge.
[11]
Rachel Macrorie, Simon Marvin, and Aidan While. 2021. Robotics and automation in the city: a research agenda. Urban Geography 42, 2 (Feb. 2021), 197–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2019.1698868 Publisher: Routledge.
[12]
Harsh Maithani, Juan A. Corrales Ramon, Laurent Lequievre, Youcef Mezouar, and Matthieu Alric. 2021. Exoscarne: Assistive Strategies for an Industrial Meat Cutting System Based on Physical Human-Robot Interaction. Applied Sciences 11, 9 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/app11093907
[13]
N. Karavas, A. Ajoudani, N. Tsagarakis, and D. Caldwell. 2013. Human-inspired balancing assistance: Application to a knee exoskeleton. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO). 292–297. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBIO.2013.6739474 Journal Abbreviation: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO).
[14]
Simone Nertinger, Robin Jeanne Kirschner, Abdeldjallil Naceri, and Sami Haddadin. 2022. Acceptance of Remote Assistive Robots with and without Human-in-the-Loop for Healthcare Applications. International Journal of Social Robotics (Oct. 2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-022-00931-9
[15]
Moon Young Park, Doyeon Han, Jung Ho Lim, Min Kyung Shin, Young Rok Han, Dong Hwan Kim, Sungsoo Rhim, and Kyung Sook Kim. 2019. Assessment of pressure pain thresholds in collisions with collaborative robots. PLOS ONE 14, 5 (May 2019), e0215890. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215890 Publisher: Public Library of Science.
[16]
Valerie Power, Leonard O’Sullivan, Adam de Eyto, Samuel Schülein, Corien Nikamp, Christoph Bauer, Jeannette Mueller, and Jesús Ortiz. 2016. Exploring User Requirements for a Lower Body Soft Exoskeleton to Assist Mobility. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments(PETRA ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/2910674.2935827 event-place: Corfu, Island, Greece.
[17]
Marina Ringwald, Paulina Theben, Ken Gerlinger, Annika Hedrich, and Barbara Klein. 2023. How Should Your Assistive Robot Look Like? A Scoping Review on Embodiment for Assistive Robots. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems 107, 1 (Jan. 2023), 12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-022-01781-3
[18]
Linda Shore, Adam de Eyto, and L. O’Sullivan. 2018. Investigating Perceptions Related to Technology Acceptance & Stigma of Wearable Robotic Assistive Devices by Older Adults - Preliminary Findings. DRS2018: Catalyst null (2018), null. https://doi.org/10.21606/DRS.2018.477
[19]
Linda Shore, A. de Eyto, and L. O’Sullivan. 2020. Technology acceptance and perceptions of robotic assistive devices by older adults – implications for exoskeleton design. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 17 (2020), 782 – 790. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2020.1817988
[20]
Linda Shore, V. Power, A. D. Eyto, and L. O’Sullivan. 2018. Technology Acceptance and User-Centred Design of Assistive Exoskeletons for Older Adults: A Commentary. Robotics 7 (2018), 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/ROBOTICS7010003
[21]
Linda Shore, Valerie Power, Bernard Hartigan, Samuel Schülein, Eveline Graf, Adam de Eyto, and Leonard O’Sullivan. 2020. Exoscore: A Design Tool to Evaluate Factors Associated With Technology Acceptance of Soft Lower Limb Exosuits by Older Adults. Human Factors 62, 3 (May 2020), 391–410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819868122 Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc.
[22]
Nahema Sylla, Vincent Bonnet, Frédéric Colledani, and Philippe Fraisse. 2014. Ergonomic contribution of ABLE exoskeleton in automotive industry. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 44, 4 (July 2014), 475–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2014.03.008
[23]
Katharina Vornholt, Patrizia Villotti, Beate Muschalla, Jana Bauer, Adrienne Colella, Fred Zijlstra, Gemma Van Ruitenbeek, Sjir Uitdewilligen, and Marc Corbière. 2018. Disability and employment – overview and highlights. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 27, 1 (Jan. 2018), 40–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2017.1387536 Publisher: Routledge.
[24]
Astrid Weiss, Andreas Huber, Jürgen Minichberger, and Markus Ikeda. 2016. First Application of Robot Teaching in an Existing Industry 4.0 Environment: Does It Really Work?Societies 6, 3 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3390/soc6030020
[25]
Ya-Huei Wu, Victoria Cristancho-Lacroix, Christine Fassert, Véronique Faucounau, Jocelyne de Rotrou, and Anne-Sophie Rigaud. 2016. The Attitudes and Perceptions of Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment Toward an Assistive Robot. Journal of Applied Gerontology 35, 1 (Jan. 2016), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464813515092 Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc.
Index Terms
- From Pain to Design Recommendations for Assistive Robotics
Recommendations
Implementing Assistive Technology on Wearable Computers
The article presents the author's work in developing assistive technology for disabled users. He makes a case for wearable computers and focuses on design strategies that accommodate the users' changing needs. He points out that what might seem ...
“I Choose Assistive Devices That Save My Face”: A Study on Perceptions of Accessibility and Assistive Technology Use Conducted in China
CHI '21: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsDespite the potential benefits of assistive technologies (ATs) for people with various disabilities, only around 7% of Chinese with disabilities have had an opportunity to use ATs. Even for those who have used ATs, the abandonment rate was high. ...
What difference does tech make? Conceptualizations of Disability and Assistive Technology among Kenyan Youth: Conceptualizations of Disability and AT
ASSETS '21: Proceedings of the 23rd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and AccessibilityMost research which investigates stigma towards with people with disabilities and the use of Assistive Technology (AT) are based in the Global North and focus on the experiences of people with disabilities and the consequences that stigma has on choices ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
December 2023
506 pages
ISBN:9798400708244
DOI:10.1145/3623809
Copyright © 2023 Owner/Author.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 04 December 2023
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Poster
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
HAI '23
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 121 of 404 submissions, 30%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 67Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)49
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
Reflects downloads up to 09 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format