Occupational therapists' acceptance of 3D printing

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17159/2310-3833/2023/vol53n2a2

Keywords:

Assistive Technology, Three-dimensional Printing (3dp), Technology Acceptance Model (tam), Additive Manufacturing, Orthosis, Splinting, Assistive Devices

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In occupational therapy, three-dimensional printing is being explored as an alternative design and manufacturing technique to the conventional fabrication of orthotics and assistive devices. The global applications and literature are rapidly growing, but the South African - specific literature is deficient. The Technology Acceptance Model depicts that one's perception of any particular technology is a significant determinant of their acceptance of it, determining whether the technology system is successfully adopted or disregarded AIM: To determine the perceived acceptance of three-dimensional printing technology amongst occupational therapists in KwaZulu-Natal and whether exposure to the technology system, in the form of a three-dimensional printing workshop, influences their perception of the technology METHOD: The study followed a multi-method design consisting of two phases; phase one involved the creation of the intervention tool (workshop), which was developed through a process guided by Design-Based Research. Phase two involved the implementation of the intervention and data collection. Therapists documented their perceptions in a questionnaire before and after exposure; following a pre and post-test design, enabling comparison. The questionnaires were based on the Technology Acceptance Model, including 13 questions scored on a seven-point Likert scale and five open-ended questions. The quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and qualitative data were analysed thematically RESULTS: All four categories of the Technology Acceptance Model-based questionnaire displayed a significant change (p < 0.05) between the pre and post-test responses, with a medium effect size CONCLUSION: Exposure to three-dimensional printing influences therapists' perception of the technology IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE • The application of Three-Dimensional Printing (3DP) in occupational therapy practice has the potential to enable increased accuracy and precision of items fabricated by therapists; enabling customisation and individualisation to the exact specifications of a patient. • 3DP can open doors to a broad spectrum of items that are not easily accessible, affordable, or not even available, accessing ideas and blueprints from a global pool of resources through open-source sites. • With the process of fabrication being digital, not only does this reduce manual labour, but fabricating without touching the patient can reduce pain and prevent disruption of a repair/ surgical site/ wound. • The digital process also allows patients to see and visualise the product during the design process, enabling input prior to printing, contributing to reduced wastage.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ishengoma FR, Mtaho AB. 3D printing: developing countries perspectives. International Journal of Computer Applications. 2014;104(11):30-4. doi: https:/doi.org/10.5120/18249-9329

Matias E, Rao B. 3D Printing: on its historical evolution and the implications for business. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET). 2015; (15)551-8. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1109/picmet.2015.7273052

Fitzpatrick A. Design of a patient specific 3D printed arm cast. KnE Engineering. 2017;2(2): 135-42. doi: https:/doi.org/10.18502/keg.v2i2.607

Dodziuk H. Applications of 3D printing in healthcare. Polish Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery. 2016;13(3):283-93. doi: https:/doi.org/10.5114/kitp.2016.62625

Yan Q, Dong H, Su J, Han J, Song B, Wei Q, et al. A review of 3D printing technology for medical applications. Engineering. 2018;4(5):729-42. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2018.07.021

Paterson A, Donnison E, Bibb R, Campbell I. Computer aided design to support fabrication of wrist splints using 3D printing: a feasibility study. Hand Therapy. 2014;19(4):102-13. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1177/1758998314544802

Liu L. Occupational therapy in the fourth industrial revolution. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2018;85(4):272-83. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1177/0008417418815179

Chuttur M. Overview of the Technology Acceptance Model: origins, developments and future directions. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems. 2009;9(37):1-22

Rensburg R. Healthcare in South Africa: how inequity is contributing to inefficiency. The Conversation Africa, Inc. 2021 [accessed 2022 Nov]. https:/theconversation.com/healthcare-in-south-africa-how-inequity-iscontributing-to-inefficiency-163753#:~:text=South%20Africa%20has%20a%20two-tiered%2C%20and%20highly%20-unequal%2C,insurance%2C%20and%20serves%20around%2027%25%20of%20the%20population.

Jejelaye A, Maseko L, Franzsen D. Occupational therapy services and perception of integration of these at primary healthcare level in South Africa. South African Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2019;49(3):46-53. doi: https:/doi.org/10.17159/2310-3833/2019/vol49n3a8

Buehler E, Branham S, Ali A, Chang JJ, Hofmann MK, Hurst A, Kane SK. Sharing is caring: assistive technology designs on Thingiverse. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2015;525-34. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702525

Visagie S, Scheffler E, Seymour N, Mji G. Assistive Technology Service Delivery in South Africa: Conceptualising a Systems Approach. South African Health Review. 2020;(1)120- 7. doi: https:/journals.co.za/doi/abs/10.10520/ejc-healthr-v2020-n1-a15

OECD. National Development Plan 2030: Our future-make it work. Executive Summary. 2012 [accessed 2022 October]. https:/www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201409/ndp-2030-our-future-make-it-workr.pdf.

Hale L, Linley E, Kalaskar D. A digital workflow for design and fabrictaion of bespoke orthoses using 3D scanning and 3D printing, a patient- based case study. Scientific Reports. 2020;10(1). doi: https:/doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-63937-1

Li J, Tanaka H. Rapid Customization system for 3D-printed splint using programmable modeling technique - a practical approach. 3D Printing in Medicine. 2018;4(1):5 doi: https:/doi.org/10.1186/s41205-018-0027-6

Davis CP. MedicineNet. 2021 [accessed 2022 October]. https:/www.medicinenet.com/assistive_device/definition.htm.

Day SJ, Riley SP. Utilising three-dimensional printing techniques when providing unique assistive devices: a case report. Prosthetics & Orthotics International. 2018;42(1):45-9. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1177/0309364617741776

Lee Y, Kozar KA, Larsen KRT. The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2003;2:752-80. doi: https:/doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.01250

Chen SC, Li SH, Li CY. Recent related Research in Technology Acceptance Model: a literature review. Australian Journal of Business Management and Research. 2011;1(9): 124-7. doi: https:/doi.org/10.52283/nswrca.ajbmr.20110109a14

Vaezi H, Moonaghi HK, Golbaf R. Design-Based Research: definition, characteristics, application and challenges. Journal

of Education in Black Sea Region. 2019;5(1):26-35. doi: https:/doi.org/10.31578/jebs.v5i1.185

Scott EE, Wenderoth MP, Doherty JH. Design-Based Research: a methodology to extend and enrich biology education. CBE—Life Sciences Education. 2020;19(3):1-12. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-11-0245

Ford C, McNally D, Ford K. Using Design- Based Research in higher education innovation. Online Learning. 2017;21(3):50-67. doi: https:/doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i3.1232

Armstrong M, Dopp C, Welsh J. Students' guide to learning design and Research. 2018 [accessed 2022 October]. https:/edtechbooks.org/studentguide

Naumann E. Perspectives on Africa's trade and integration. TralacBlog. 2020 [accessed 2022 October]. https:/www.tralac.org/blog/article/14567-south-africa-s-newstatus-as-a-developed-country-for-purposes-of-unitedstates-subsidies-and-countervailing-duty-investigations.html.

The World Bank Group. The World Bank in South Africa. 2021 [accessed 2022 October]. https:/www.worldbank.org/en/country/southafrica/overview

Young M. Western Michigan University - Scholarworks@WMU. 2016 [accessed 2022 November]. https:/scholarworks.wmich.edu/honors_theses/2741.

Phillips G. Who owns whom. Africa Business Information. 2022 [accessed 2022 November]. https:/www.whoownswhom.co.za/report-store/healthcare-sector-south-africa-2022/.

Benham S, San S. Student technology acceptance of 3D printing in occupational therapy education. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2020;74(3):1-7. doi: https:/doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2020.035402

Shek DT, Zhu X. Pretest–posttest designs. In B. Frey (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation. SAGE Publications, Inc. 2018:1293-5 doi: https:/dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781506326139.n538

Piasta SB, Justice IM. Encyclopedia of Research Design. Salkind NJ, editor. SAGE Publications, Inc; 2010.181-85. doi: https:/dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288

Campbell MJ, Swinscow TDV. Statistics at Square One. Wiley-Blackwell: BMJ. 2009; 11th(Ed).

Miceli S. Reproducibility and Replicability in Research. The National Academies In Focus, 2019 [accessed 2022 November]. https:/www.nationalacademies.org/news/2019/09/reproducibility-and-replicability-inresearch#:~:text=Replicability%20means%20obtaining%20consistent%20results,about%20replicability%20are%20more-%20nuanced.

Brown JD. Characteristics of sound quantitative Research. Shiken. 2015;19(2):24-8.

Patton MQ. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice. 4th edition. California: SAGE Publications, Inc; 2015.

Lakens D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology. 2013;4(863):1-12. doi: https:/doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863

Egan M, Brosseau L, Farmer M, Ouimet M, Rees S, Tugwell P, et al. Splints and Orthosis for treating rheumatoid arthritis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2001;2010(7):1-5. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd004018

Willett AK, 3D Printing and Occupational Therapy: The Process of 3D Printing Adaptive Devices. Eastern Kentucky University, Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy. Honors Theses. 2019;654. https:/encompass.eku.edu/honors_theses/654

Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A Model of the antecedents of percieved ease of use: development and test. A Journal of the Decision Sciences Institute. 1996;27(3):451-81. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x

Heslin PA, Klehe UC. Self- Efficacy. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 2006;(2):705-8.

Compeau D, Higgins C. Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly. 1995;19(2):189-211. doi: https:/doi.org/10.2307/249688

Czaja SJ, Charness N, Fisk AD, Hertzog C, Nair SN, Rogers WA, et al. Factors Predicting the Use of Technology: Findings From the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychology and Aging. 2006;21(2):333-52. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.21.2.333

Holzinger A, Searle G, Wernbacher M. The effect of previous exposure to technology on acceptance and its importance in usability and accessibility engineering. Universal Access in the Information Society. 2011;10(3):245-60. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1007/s10209-010-0212-x

Frey CB, Osborne MA. The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2013;114:254-80. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019

Vogels EA, Rainie L, Anderson J. Experts predict more digital innovation by 2030 aimed at enhancing democracy. Pew Research Center. 2020. Report No:ED609129:133

Holden H, Roy R. Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers’ technology acceptance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2011;43(4):343–67. doi: https:/doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2011.10782576

Laher AE, Van Aardt BJ, Craythorne AD, Van Welie M, Malinga DM, Madi S. ‘Getting out of the dark’: implications of load shedding on healthcare in South Africa and strategies to enhance preparedness. South African Medical Journal. 2019;109(12):899-901. doi: https:/doi.org/10.7196/samj.2019.v109i12.14322

Downloads

Published

22-08-2023

How to Cite

Barter, S. L., Williams, A. J., Rencken, G., Ndaba, N., & Govender, P. (2023). Occupational therapists’ acceptance of 3D printing. South African Journal of Occupational Therapy, 53(2), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.17159/2310-3833/2023/vol53n2a2

Issue

Section

Research Articles