Bridging the Awareness-Application Gap in Emerging Rehabilitation Technologies: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Rehabilitation Trainees

Abstract

Background: Emerging rehabilitation technologies are reshaping rehabilitation assessment, intervention, monitoring, and service delivery. However, the extent to which rehabilitation trainees are prepared to understand and use these technologies remains insufficiently characterized. This study aimed to evaluate rehabilitation trainees’ awareness, practical use, exposure depth, self-perceived application competence, perceived barriers, and educational support needs related to emerging rehabilitation technologies.
Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted among rehabilitation-related trainees and early-career respondents. The questionnaire assessed demographic characteristics, awareness and self-reported practical use of seven technology categories, technology learning interest, exposure to technology-related knowledge and practice, self-perceived application competence, contextual and competency-related barriers, and preferred educational supports. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Awareness-application gaps were calculated
as percentage-point differences between awareness and self-reported practical use. Exact McNemar tests and Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment were used for exploratory paired comparisons where applicable. Internal consistency of multi-item scales was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha.

Results: A total of 135 valid questionnaires were analyzed. Awareness was highest for wearable devices, rehabilitation robots, and intelligent rehabilitation assessment or training software, whereas self-reported practical use remained substantially lower across all technology categories. The largest awareness-application gaps were observed for brain-computer interface technology (31.86%), virtual reality (VR) rehabilitation (29.63%), intelligent rehabilitation assessment or training software (28.85%), and wearable devices (28.15%). Most participants expressed at least some interest in technology-related learning, but structured exposure and operational practice remained limited. Contextual barriers were perceived at a near-moderate level, with rapid technology iteration and insufficient training/practical application showing the highest mean scores. The most frequently reported competency-related barriers were lack of learning resources and inadequate proficiency in operating new equipment. Participants most strongly preferred basic training equipment courses and integration of technology equipment content into existing courses.
Conclusion: Rehabilitation trainees showed meaningful interest and partial awareness of emerging rehabilitation technologies, but awareness was not consistently translated into self-reported  practical use, supervised exposure, or clinical learning. Curriculum reform should move beyond technology introduction and provide progressive, practice-oriented, clinically integrated training to support technology-ready rehabilitation competence.