Background Physical rehabilitation exergames (PREGs) are suitable for motivating patients toward completing treatments. Leap Motion (LM) is a motion sensor that may be useful for developing PREGs targeted at hands and fingers rehabilitation. Therefore, knowing the advantages and limitations of LM is relevant to understand under which conditions this sensor may be suitable.
Objective In this article, we present a qualitative study to identify the main advantages and limitations of LM for PREGs.
Methods We collect data using interviews with a group of PREGs developers, physical therapy experts, and patients. We employ the thematic analysis method to analyze the collected data.
Results We found that the advantages and limitations of LM are related to (1) the role as PREG development tool that enables hand movements detection, (2) the capability to be a mobile and easy-to-use capturing technology, and (3) the contribution to add value in rehabilitation therapy by motivating physical therapists and patients to use PREGs.
Conclusion The analysis shows that LM is a suitable and cost-effective solution for developing usable PREGs for some hand and finger rehabilitation movements with a moderate development effort. However, the development maturity of LM poses limitations related to reliability and robustness, preventing the use of LM as a standalone physical rehabilitation tool. Our findings serve as guidelines for developers and physical therapists during the development and use of PREGs targeted at hands and fingers, guiding the decision-making process during feasibility analysis and design stages.
Evaluating the Quality of Experience (QoE) of video streaming and its influence factors has become paramount for streaming providers, as they want to maintain high satisfaction for their customers. In this context, crowdsourced user studies became a valuable tool to evaluate different factors which can affect the perceived user experience on a large scale. In general, most of these crowdsourcing studies either use, what we refer to, as an in vivo or an in vitro interface design. In vivo design means that the study participant has to rate the QoE of a video that is embedded in an application similar to a real streaming service, e.g., YouTube or Netflix. In vitro design refers to a setting, in which the video stream is separated from a specific service and thus, the video plays on a plain background. Although these interface designs vary widely, the results are often compared and generalized. In this work, we use a crowdsourcing study to investigate the influence of three interface design alternatives, an in vitro and two in vivo designs with different levels of interactiveness, on the perceived video QoE. Contrary to our expectations, the results indicate that there is no significant influence of the study’s interface design in general on the video experience. Furthermore, we found that the in vivo design does not reduce the test takers’ attentiveness. However, we observed that participants who interacted with the test interface reported a higher video QoE than other groups.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.