An industrial exoskeleton user acceptance framework based on a literature review of empirical studies

被引:71
作者
Elprama, Shirley A. [1 ]
Vanderborght, Bram [2 ]
Jacobs, An [1 ]
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Brussel BruBotics, Imec SMIT, Pl Laan 9, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
[2] Vrije Univ Brussel, Imec, BruBotics, Pl Laan 2, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
Acceptance; Industrial exoskeletons; Use; Usage; Comfort; Technology acceptance; Discomfort; Human-machine interaction; UPPER-LIMB EXOSKELETON; UPPER-BODY POSTURE; TECHNOLOGY; MODEL; WORKERS; TASKS;
D O I
10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103615
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
Studying the acceptance of exoskeletons in industry has gained increased attention. Exoskeletons (wearable support devices) are envisioned to alleviate heavy work. Examining what factors influence the use of exoskeletons is important, because influencing these factors could positively contribute to the adoption of industrial exoskeletons. The factors identified in this paper have been systematically derived from empirical research with (potential future) end users, most of whom have tried on an exoskeleton. Our framework with factors influencing the acceptance of industrial exoskeletons can be used during the (ideally iterative) design, (re)development and evaluation phase of new or existing exoskeletons. This could improve the quality of exoskeletons since this allows designers to already consider acceptance factors early in the design process instead of finding out what is important late in the design process during (field) testing. In turn, this might accelerate the adoption of exoskeletons. Also, our framework can be used to study the ongoing introduction of exoskeletons at work since it also addresses policy decisions companies interested in implementing exoskeletons should consider.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 51 条
[1]  
Amandels Steven, 2019, Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018). Volume III: Musculoskeletal Disorders. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (AISC 820), P387, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-96083-8_51
[2]   Passive Trunk Exoskeleton Acceptability and Effects on Self-efficacy in Employees with Low-Back Pain: A Mixed Method Approach [J].
Baltrusch, S. J. ;
Houdijk, H. ;
van Dieen, J. H. ;
Kruif, J. Th. C. M. de .
JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL REHABILITATION, 2021, 31 (01) :129-141
[3]   The effect of a passive trunk exoskeleton on functional performance in healthy individuals [J].
Baltrusch, S. J. ;
van Dieen, J. H. ;
van Bennekom, C. A. M. ;
Houdijk, H. .
APPLIED ERGONOMICS, 2018, 72 :94-106
[4]   Testing an Exoskeleton That Helps Workers With Low-Back Pain: Less Discomfort With the Passive SPEXOR Trunk Device [J].
Baltrusch, Saskia J. ;
van Dieen, Jaap H. ;
van Bennekom, Coen A. M. ;
Houdijk, Han .
IEEE ROBOTICS & AUTOMATION MAGAZINE, 2020, 27 (01) :66-76
[5]   Supporting Surgical Teams: Identifying Needs and Barriers for Exoskeleton Implementation in the Operating Room [J].
Cha, Jackie S. ;
Monfared, Sara ;
Stefanidis, Dimitrios ;
Nussbaum, Maury A. ;
Yu, Denny .
HUMAN FACTORS, 2020, 62 (03) :377-390
[6]  
Charmaz K., 2006, CONSTRUCTING GROUNDE, DOI DOI 10.7748/NR.13.4.84.S4
[8]   Passive Shoulder Exoskeletons: More Effective in the Lab Than in the Field? [J].
De Bock, Sander ;
Ghillebert, Jo ;
Govaerts, Renee ;
Elprama, Shirley A. ;
Marusic, Uros ;
Serrien, Ben ;
Jacobs, An ;
Geeroms, Joost ;
Meeusen, Romain ;
De Pauw, Kevin .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL SYSTEMS AND REHABILITATION ENGINEERING, 2021, 29 :173-183
[9]  
De Kok J, 2019, Work-related musculoskeletal disorders: prevalence, costs and demographics in the EU, DOI DOI 10.2802/66947
[10]   The Potential and Acceptance of Exoskeletons in Industry [J].
de Looze, Michiel P. ;
Krause, Frank ;
O'Sullivan, Leonard W. .
WEARABLE ROBOTICS: CHALLENGES AND TRENDS, 2017, 16 :195-199