Extended Reality (XR) technologies are increasingly explored in rehabilitation care. They have the potential to make therapy more engaging for patients, improve adherence to treatment, and enable more rehabilitation at home. Yet despite these promising benefits, XR solutions are still not widely adopted in everyday rehabilitation practice.
New research by Luuk Baltissen, PhD candidate at Tilburg University and member of the Business Model team within the Interreg Scale-Up4Rehab project, sheds light on why this is the case.
Together with his supervisors Joris Knoben, Lien Denoo and Miranda Stienstra, Baltissen conducted a literature review examining the motivations and barriers for three key groups involved in XR rehabilitation technologies: patients, clinicians and app developers.
Shared ambitions across stakeholders
The study shows that these three groups actually share several important goals.
For example, patients, clinicians and developers all see value in enabling rehabilitation at home, often supported by family or friends. They also share an interest in technologies that encourage patients to move more frequently and stay engaged with their therapy.
These overlapping motivations suggest that XR technologies could play an important role in improving rehabilitation outcomes.
Three conflicts that slow adoption
However, the research also identifies three key conflicts between these groups that make large-scale adoption difficult.
1. Fun versus medical effectiveness
Some patients value enjoyment as much as, or even more than, the medical benefits of a digital tool. Developers can respond to this by designing engaging experiences. Clinicians, however, will only prescribe XR tools if they are clinically effective and support medical outcomes.
2. Remote care versus professional experience
XR enables patients to exercise independently at home. While this flexibility can be beneficial for patients, clinicians may feel they lose meaningful contact with their patients, which can affect their willingness to adopt these tools.
3. Development costs versus willingness to pay
Developing XR applications requires substantial investment. At the same time, patients and healthcare providers often have limited budgets or willingness to pay, making it difficult for developers to recover their costs and sustain their businesses.
Insights for future rehabilitation platforms
Understanding these tensions is essential for successfully scaling XR solutions in rehabilitation care.
The findings provide valuable insights for initiatives such as Uptimise, the digital rehabilitation platform developed within the Scale-Up4Rehab project. For example, the platform can focus on clinically validated applications, while developers can use these insights to design tools that better align with the needs of both patients and clinicians.
By addressing the needs of all stakeholders, XR technologies may become a more viable and scalable solution for rehabilitation in the future.
📎 The research insights were also summarized in a (PDF) highlighting the main conflicts between stakeholders.
