Makers in Healthcare: The Role of Occupational Therapists in the Design of DIY Assistive Technology

Advancements in personal fabrication technologies (e.g. 3D printing) resulted in a rising interest in 'do-it-yourself assistive technology' (DIY AT). Clinical knowledge is considered fundamental for DIY AT design, but research into making DIY AT by clinicians is limited. In this paper, we explore occupational therapists' attitudes towards 3D printing both before and after gaining hands-on experience with 3D modelling software. In addition, as clinicians indicate to prefer collaborations with experienced designers, we organized a codesign study with occupational therapists and professional designers to conceptualize a feasible collaborative DIY-AT design process. The results of our studies show an overall enthusiasm of occupational therapists towards 3D printing, but the perceived impact of 3D printing on their job performance decreased after gaining hands-on experience. Collaborating with designers seems a viable way forward. We propose a model for a collaborative design process, highlighting different phases and the roles that occupational therapists and designers play.

[1]  Luc Geurts,et al.  Empowering Occupational Therapists with a DIY-toolkit for Smart Soft Objects , 2015, TEI.

[2]  Patrick Olivier,et al.  A study of the challenges related to DIY assistive technology in the context of children with disabilities , 2014, Conference on Designing Interactive Systems.

[3]  Graham Pervan,et al.  ICT and OTs: A model of information and communication technology acceptance and utilisation by occupational therapists , 2007, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[4]  Scott E. Hudson,et al.  Clinical and Maker Perspectives on the Design of Assistive Technology with Rapid Prototyping Technologies , 2016, ASSETS.

[5]  Scott E. Hudson,et al.  "Occupational Therapy is Making": Clinical Rapid Prototyping and Digital Fabrication , 2019, CHI.

[6]  Lieven De Couvreur,et al.  Design for (every)one: co-creation as a bridge between universal design and rehabilitation engineering , 2011 .

[7]  Antonio Miguel Cruz,et al.  What factors determine therapists’ acceptance of new technologies for rehabilitation – a study using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) , 2015, Disability and rehabilitation.

[8]  Selina Schepers,et al.  MAP-it. A participatory mapping toolkit , 2011 .

[9]  Amy Hurst,et al.  Investigating the Implications of 3D Printing in Special Education , 2016, ACM Trans. Access. Comput..

[10]  Belinda Paulovich.  Design to Improve the Health Education Experience: Using Participatory Design Methods in Hospitals with Clinicians and Patients , 2015 .

[11]  Amy Hurst,et al.  Sharing is Caring: Assistive Technology Designs on Thingiverse , 2015, CHI.

[12]  M. Radomski,et al.  Occupational therapy for physical dysfunction , 1977 .

[13]  Amy Hurst,et al.  Uncovering Challenges and Opportunities for 3D Printing Assistive Technology with Physical Therapists , 2016, ASSETS.

[14]  L. Hingstman,et al.  Cijfers uit de registratie van ergotherapeuten: peiling 1 januari 2004. , 2006 .

[15]  Selina Schepers,et al.  Mapping design practices: on risk, hybridity and participation , 2012, PDC '12.

[16]  Amy Hurst,et al.  Empowering individuals with do-it-yourself assistive technology , 2011, ASSETS.

[17]  Amy Hurst,et al.  ABC and 3D: opportunities and obstacles to 3D printing in special education environments , 2014, ASSETS.

[18]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[19]  T. Schmid.  Meanings of creativity within occupational therapy practice , 2004 .