Usability and Performance Evaluation of a Locally Developed Counterbalance Arm Sling for Hemiparesis Rehabilitation
Authors
Faculty of Industrial & Manufacturing Technology & Engineering, University Technical Malaysia Melaka, 76100, Durian Tunggal, Melaka (Malaysia)
Nur Nabilah Binti Mohamad Khairon
Faculty of Industrial & Manufacturing Technology & Engineering, University Technical Malaysia Melaka, 76100, Durian Tunggal, Melaka (Malaysia)
Article Information
DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100365
Subject Category: Engineering & Technology
Volume/Issue: 9/11 | Page No: 4663-4669
Publication Timeline
Submitted: 2025-11-13
Accepted: 2025-12-20
Published: 2025-12-11
Abstract
This study reports the usability and performance evaluation of a mobile, detachable counterbalance arm sling (CBAS) designed to support upper-limb rehabilitation for people with hemiparesis. The device targets key clinical goals of shoulder stabilization, range-of-motion (ROM) support, and reduced therapist burden while remaining low-cost and locally manufacturable. A structured evaluation at a rehabilitation center engaged physiotherapists and a stroke survivor, using a three-part instrument including product rating, performance scale, and recommendation or comments. Respondents rated the CBAS from good to very good across eight usability criteria contains the ease of use, comfort, style, lightweight, functionality, ROM improvement, safety, ergonomics. 25% of the respondents rated performance superior and the remainder acceptable, with 100% recommending continued use. Findings align with contemporary evidence that weight-supporting/mobile arm support can foster arm activity and functional training in hemiparesis, and that usability-first design is crucial for adoption and adherence in real-world rehab. The CBAS demonstrates clinical promise and a path to scalable local production.
Keywords
hemiparesis, arm support, counterbalance sling, usability, rehabilitation engineering.
Downloads
References
1. Pollock, G. Bailey, and C. Langhorne, “Physical rehabilitation approaches for the recovery of function and mobility following stroke,” Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., vol. 10, 2014. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
2. S. Balasubramanian, J. Burdet, and E. Reinkensmeyer, “Robotic assistive technologies for upper-limb rehabilitation after stroke,” J. NeuroEng. Rehabil., vol. 12, pp. 1–17, 2015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
3. S. Rahman and N. Siahaan, “User-centred design approach in rehabilitation technology,” Bioengineering, vol. 6, no. 3, 2019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
4. K. Y. Lee et al., “Ergonomic design framework for upper-limb exoskeletons,” Appl. Ergonomics, vol. 85, [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
5. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
6. M. J. Johnson et al., “Usability evaluation of assistive devices for motor rehabilitation,” IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng., vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 1781–1790, 2017. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
7. S. Jeong and C. Kim, “Early-stage usability testing for rehabilitation devices,” Healthcare, vol. 9, no. 7, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
8. L. Resnik, R. A. Baxter, and J. Klinger, “Clinical usability of upper-limb prosthetic devices,” Prosthet. Orthot. Int., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 45–56, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
9. H. van der Loos and C. Reinkensmeyer, “Rehabilitation robotics and assistive exoskeletons,” Med. Eng. Phys., vol. 87, pp. 1–12, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
10. L. Zhang et al., “Lightweight assistive arm exoskeleton for stroke rehabilitation,” Sensors, vol. 20, no. 19, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
11. R. Mahmood, “Development of low-cost rehabilitation devices for developing countries,” J. Med. Devices, vol. 13, no. 2, 2019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
12. N. K. P. Rahim, “Mechanical analysis of counterbalance sling mechanisms,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 2296, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
13. G. Coenen, L. Jonkers, and D. T. Claeys, “User acceptance of robotic rehabilitation systems,” Front. Rehab. Sci., vol. 2, pp. 1–9, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
14. F. Saleh, M. Shafie, and Z. Abdul Rahman, “Passive assistive training devices for stroke rehabilitation: Design and evaluation,” Technologies, vol. 11, no. 1, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
15. P. Nordin and T. Hassan, “Comparative mechanical assessment of rehabilitation arm supports,” BioMed Eng. Online, vol. 17, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
16. D. Chen, Y. Li, and H. Xie, “Integration of EMG sensing for adaptive rehabilitation,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 58739–58749, 2023. A. Page Layout [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
Metrics
Views & Downloads
Similar Articles
- The Impact Of UI/UX Design on User Trust and Task Completion in Civic Tech Platforms
- Solar Cell Photovoltaic Model Shell Sp 75
- Development of an Intelligent Traffic Management System to Address Visibility Obstruction at Urban Intersections: A Case Study of Ibadan Metropolis
- Optimum Placement of Facts Devices on an Interconnected Power Systems Using Particle Swarm Optimisation Technique
- Assessing Construction Transformation and Implication on Future Production Flow System