| الملخص: | Robotic walking assistance devices support the rehabilitation of patients with neurological impairments. However, most commercialized systems rely on treadmill-based walking, which may not reflect real-world environments. This study aimed to evaluate the usability of a newly developed over-ground walking assistance robot (OWAR-MW) based on mecanum wheels compared with a commercial system (Andago) from the perspectives of physical therapists and patients with stroke. Nine physical therapists and nine stroke patients participated. Each participant walked 100 m using both the OWAR-MW and Andago systems. Subsequently, a satisfaction survey was conducted across three categories—safety, operability and functionality, and convenience—using a questionnaire adapted from the standard usability testing guidelines for walking assistive devices. Additionally, in-depth interviews were conducted to explore user experience and improvement needs. In both participant groups, the OWAR-MW showed a tendency for lower satisfaction scores than Andago across all categories. Stroke patients reported significantly lower scores in all three categories (safety: 4.90 vs. 4.04, operability and functionality: 4.83 vs. 4.33, convenience: 4.87 vs. 4.49, <i>p</i> < 0.05), whereas therapists noted a significant difference only in safety (4.02 vs. 3.37, <i>p</i> < 0.05). Key issues identified included a lack of handles, delay in actuator response, low motion detection sensitivity, non-intuitive controls, and discomfort caused by the harness, particularly the thigh straps. OWAR-MW demonstrated usability limitations in its current prototype form. Technical improvements in user interface, control accuracy, and harness design are necessary before clinical application. This study provides valuable feedback for the future development of user-centered rehabilitation robotics.
|
|---|
