Introducing robotic upper limb training into routine clinical practice for stroke survivors: Perceptions of occupational therapists and physiotherapists

Introduction: Robot‐assisted therapy for the upper limb (RT‐UL) is an emerging form of intervention for stroke survivors with upper limb deficits. However, there is limited knowledge regarding therapists’ perceptions of RT‐UL and the factors influencing the implementation of RT‐UL into the clinical setting. This is important when considering that therapists in Australia are primarily responsible for the prescription of RT‐UL in daily practice. This study aimed to explore occupational therapists’ and physiotherapists’ perceptions of RT‐UL and the perceived barriers and enablers influencing implementation. Methods: Two discipline‐specific focus groups were conducted involving occupational therapists (n = 6) and physiotherapists (n = 6). Participants were members of the same multidisciplinary team working in an Australian public health rehabilitation facility where RT‐UL (i.e. InMotion2) was being introduced for the first time. Focus groups explored therapist perceptions of the new RT‐UL as well as perceived barriers and enablers to implementation. Focus groups were recorded, transcribed and deductively analysed using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Results: Out of the 14 domains of the TDF, 7 were raised by participants during the focus groups: environmental context and resources, beliefs about consequences, optimism, knowledge, skills, social influences, and social and professional role and identity. Therapists’ expressed their optimism towards the introduction of RT‐UL but believed successful implementation would be primarily dependent on the availability of clinical leadership, training and a suitable client mix. Conclusion: Therapists perceived that RT‐UL would provide opportunity for increased upper limb practice particularly for patients with severe upper limb impairment. To facilitate implementation, support of RT‐UL should come from both management and clinical leaders and training include RT‐UL efficacy, device functionality and patient suitability. The availability of a single RT‐UL device in a workplace may create unique interdisciplinary and logistical challenges