OCCUPATIONAL APPLICATIONSMultiple occupational exoskeletons have been developed recently with potential to reduce physical demands, muscle fatigue, and risk of over-exertion injuries in manufacturing, yet there are currently challenges in practical, large-scale deployment. We explored how stakeholder perceptions of exoskeletons were affected by exposure to passive arm- and back-support exoskeletons. Our outcomes indicate that even brief exposure to exoskeletons can positively influence worker and stakeholder perceptions on the usefulness and safety of exoskeletons. However, worker concerns about device usability and acceptability in the field were not mitigated by such brief exposure. This work may help manufacturing industry stakeholders understand what technology-adoption factors need further consideration when planning for exoskeleton deployment.
Keywords: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders; exoskeleton adoption; intervention; passive exoskeleton; wearable technology.
Background: Despite evidence from several laboratory studies on the effectiveness of passive exoskeletons to support specific industrial jobs, barriers to adoption still exist. Contextual factors underlying exoskeleton adoption need further understanding. Purpose: We aimed to document how stakeholder perceptions of exoskeleton technologies could be affected by physical exposure to a wide variety of exoskeletons, by providing an opportunity to wear them and perform standardized tasks. Methods: We recorded the opinions of 22 participants from different manufacturing industries, both before and after trying seven different passive arm-support and back-support occupational EXOs. EXO expectations, adoption factors/barriers in their work settings, and perceived next steps for implementing such technologies were captured. Participants also completed usability questionnaires after each EXO trial. Results: Even brief exposure to EXOs positively influenced both worker and stakeholder perceptions on exoskeleton usefulness and safety; in contrast, worker concerns about usability and acceptability remained unchanged. Participants indicated stronger preferences for some specific EXO technologies, in terms of ease of use, performance improvements, and applicability. Conclusions: Actual exposure to occupational exoskeletons, even if brief, was found to alter worker and stakeholder perceptions of exoskeleton usefulness and safety. Future work on technology perceptions and intention to use exoskeletons may need to consider physical exposure to devices before soliciting perceptions, especially for novel technologies like exoskeletons.