• The Journal of Korean Physical Therapy
• /
• 제33권2호
• /
• pp.69-75
• /
• 2021

Purpose: This study examined the recognition of rehabilitative robots for treatment in physical therapists. Methods: This study surveyed 100 physical therapists in Seoul and Gyeonggi-do using Google Form, an online survey tool. The questionnaire consisted of 21 questions, including eight questions on the general characteristics, 13 questions on the recognition of rehabilitative robots. Results: The general characteristics of the physical therapists showed differences and influences on recognition of rehabilitative robots, and there were statistically significant differences. There were significant differences in the recognition of rehabilitation robots according to general characteristics in gender, age, education degree, type of hospital, average weekly working time, and treatment field. Multiple regression analysis found that gender and the type of hospital influenced the recognition of rehabilitation robots. Conclusion: Physical therapists showed differences in recognition of rehabilitative robots according to their general characteristics, and gender and the type of hospital influence the recognition of rehabilitation robots. Sufficient systematic education programs should be provided, and physical therapists require policy adjustments to increase their accessibility to rehabilitation robots through continuing education.

• PNF and Movement
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.115-125
• /
• 2021

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate basic data on the recognition of rehabilitation robots and self-efficacy through general characteristics of students in the department of physical therapy. Methods: This study surveyed 100 students in the Department of Physical Therapy at E University in Seongnam using Google Form, an online survey tool. The questionnaire consisted of 64 questions including 15 questions on general characteristics, 13 questions regarding recognition of rehabilitative robots, and 36 questions about self-efficacy. General self-efficacy consisted of three sub-factors: confidence, self-regulation efficacy, and task difficulty preference. Results: The recognition of rehabilitative robots according to general characteristics showed significant differences in age, level of education, and experience in searching rehabilitative robots; according to general characteristics, self-efficacy showed significant differences dependent on age and gender (p < 0.05). In addition, recognition of rehabilitation robots for students in the Department of Physical Therapy was found to have a significant effect on robot use self-efficacy (p < 0.05). Conclusion: There were significant differences in the scores of rehabilitation robot recognition and self-efficacy according to the general characteristics of students in the Department of Physical Therapy. For such reasons, it is important for students to have an opportunity to get educated on rehabilitation robots; in order to achieve this goal, domestic studies on rehabilitation robots must be actively conducted. The technological development of rehabilitation robots and the establishment of a system for domestic rehabilitation robots from both social and legal standpoints were found to be necessary based on a volume of domestic research.