Table 1.
Participants demographic characteristics.
Fig 1.
Different forms of somatosensory-related intervention used in clinics.
The number of responses did not always sum to 132 as participants were allowed to select multiple answers.
Table 2.
Types of standardised and non-standardised assessment of somatosensation.
Fig 2.
Adoption of technology for the purpose of either assessment or intervention.
The number of responses did not always sum to 132 as participants were allowed to select multiple answers.
Fig 3.
Technology adoption in clinical practice.
(a) Therapists’ years of experience with rehabilitation technology. (b) Perceived barriers to integrating technology in clinical practice. The number of responses did not always sum to 132 as participants were allowed to select multiple answers.
Fig 4.
Therapists’ perspectives on the role of proprioception and technology adoption in stroke rehabilitation.
(a) Perceived clinical importance of proprioception. (b) Perceived clinical importance of robotic technology. (c) Perceived clinical importance of adopting robotic technology specifically for proprioception.