Cerebral palsy is a neurodevelopmental condition that occurs pre-birth, during birth or post-birth. It often results in motor impairments and associated challenges that significantly affect functional independence and quality of life. Assistive technologies play a critical role in enhancing function and independence for young people affected by this condition. This systematic review aimed to identify the perceived benefits of such technologies for children with cerebral palsy, their families and caregivers. A systematic search of the literature identified nine articles that met the inclusion criteria. The review used meta-ethnography as its methodology, applying an interpretive approach to translate concepts across studies and generate new insights. Four third-order interpretations were identified. The first was Identity and belonging: enhancing self-esteem, motivation, independence, and improving posture and mobility. The second was Inclusion and participation: children’s willingness, relationships and parents’ perception. The third was Environmental barriers at home and school. And the fourth was Challenges in assistive technology: aesthetics, usability, knowledge gaps and the need for ongoing support. The findings highlight how assistive technologies address both physical and social challenges, improving developmental opportunities and enhancing independence, social participation and quality of life. Tailoring devices to real-world needs and strengthening collaboration among healthcare professionals, educators and families are essential for promoting children’s functional performance, well-being and inclusion in society.
| Published in | Rehabilitation Science (Volume 10, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11 |
| Page(s) | 1-15 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Assistive Technology, Cerebral Palsy, Rehabilitation, Families, Caregivers, Systematic Review
| [1] | Alazem H, McCormick A, Nicholls SG, et al. (2020) Development of a robotic walker for individuals with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 15(6): 643-651. |
| [2] | Alqahtani S, Joseph J, Dicianno B, et al. (2021) Stakeholder perspectives on research and development priorities for mobility assistive-technology: a literature review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 16(4): 362-376. |
| [3] | Bausch ME, Mittler JE, Hasselbring TS, et al. (2005) The Assistive Technology Act of 2004: What Does It Say and What Does It Mean? Physical Disabilities: Education and Related Services 23(2): 59-67. |
| [4] | Beveridge B, Feltracco D, Struyf J, et al. (2015) “You gotta try it all”: parents’ experiences with robotic gait training for their children with cerebral palsy. Physical & occupational therapy in pediatrics 35(4): 327-341. |
| [5] | Booth A. (2006) Clear and present questions: formulating questions for evidence based practice. Library hi tech. |
| [6] | Buitrago JA, Bolaños AM and Caicedo Bravo E. (2020) A motor learning therapeutic intervention for a child with cerebral palsy through a social assistive robot. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 15(3): 357-362. |
| [7] | Darling-White M, Sakash A and Hustad KC. (2018) Characteristics of speech rate in children with cerebral palsy: A longitudinal study. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 61(10): 2502-2515. |
| [8] | Eriksen MB and Frandsen TF. (2018) The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA 106(4): 420. |
| [9] | Gibson B. (2016) Rehabilitation: A post-critical approach: CRC Press. |
| [10] | Gitlin LN. (2015) Environmental adaptations for individuals with functional difficulties and their families in the home and community. International handbook of occupational therapy interventions. Springer, 165-175. |
| [11] | Hannes K and Macaitis K. (2012) A move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence synthesis: update on a review of published papers. Qualitative research 12(4): 402-442. |
| [12] | Huang I-C, Sugden D and Beveridge S. (2009a) Children's perceptions of their use of assistive devices in home and school settings. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 4(2): 95-105. |
| [13] | Huang IC, Sugden D and Beveridge S. (2009b) Assistive devices and cerebral palsy: factors influencing the use of assistive devices at home by children with cerebral palsy. Child: care, health and development 35(1): 130-139. |
| [14] | Huang IC, Sugden D and Beveridge S. (2009c) Assistive devices and cerebral palsy: the use of assistive devices at school by children with cerebral palsy. Child: care, health and development 35(5): 698-708. |
| [15] | Jeffries L, Fiss A, McCoy SW, et al. (2016) Description of primary and secondary impairments in young children with cerebral palsy. Pediatric Physical Therapy 28(1): 7-14. |
| [16] | Karlsson P, Johnston C and Barker K. (2018) Influences on students' assistive technology use at school: the views of classroom teachers, allied health professionals, students with cerebral palsy and their parents. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 13(8): 763-771. |
| [17] | Kelly J, Sadeghieh T and Adeli K. (2014) Peer review in scientific publications: benefits, critiques, & a survival guide. Ejifcc 25(3): 227. |
| [18] | Khandaker G, Muhit M, Karim T, et al. (2019) Epidemiology of cerebral palsy in Bangladesh: a population‐based surveillance study. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 61(5): 601-609. |
| [19] | Kirby RL, Rushton PW, Routhier F, et al. (2018) Extent to which caregivers enhance the wheelchair skills capacity and confidence of power wheelchair users: a cross-sectional study. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 99(7): 1295-1302. e1299. |
| [20] | Lancioni GE, Singh NN, O’Reilly MF, et al. (2019) Assistive technology to support communication in individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders. Current Developmental Disorders Reports 6(3): 126-130. |
| [21] | McKeever P, Rossen BE, Scott H, et al. (2013) The significance of uprightness: Parents’ reflections on children’s responses to a hands-free walker for children. Disability & Society 28(3): 380-392. |
| [22] | Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of internal medicine 151(4): 264-269. |
| [23] | Morgan P and McGinley J. (2014) Gait function and decline in adults with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Disability and rehabilitation 36(1): 1-9. |
| [24] | Nicholls D. (2017) Qualitative research. Part 1: Philosophies. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation 24(1): 26-33. |
| [25] | Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic reviews 10(1): 1-11. |
| [26] | Palisano RJ, Hanna SE, Rosenbaum PL, et al. (2010) Probability of walking, wheeled mobility, and assisted mobility in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 52(1): 66-71. |
| [27] | Ribeiro Volpini Lana M, Pimenta Maia J, Horta AA, et al. (2021) 'What if it were like this?' Perception of mothers of children with cerebral palsy about the ankle-foot orthosis of their children: A qualitative study. Child: care, health and development 47(2): 252-260. |
| [28] | Robart R and Boyle P. (2021) Supporting workers with lower back injuries to return to work: a meta-ethnography. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 84(2): 79-91. |
| [29] | Robertson CM, Ricci MF, O’Grady K, et al. (2017) Prevalence estimate of cerebral palsy in Northern Alberta: births, 2008-2010. Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences 44(4): 366-374. |
| [30] | Sadowska M, Sarecka-Hujar B and Kopyta I. (2020) Cerebral palsy: Current opinions on definition, epidemiology, risk factors, classification and treatment options. Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment 16: 1505. |
| [31] | Sattar R, Lawton R, Panagioti M, et al. (2021) Meta-ethnography in healthcare research: a guide to using a meta-ethnographic approach for literature synthesis. BMC Health Services Research 21(1): 1-13. |
| [32] | Scherer MJ. (2005) Living in the state of stuck: How assistive technology impacts the lives of people with disabilities: Brookline Books. |
| [33] | Singh J. (2013) Critical appraisal skills programme. Journal of pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics 4(1): 76-76. |
| [34] | Smithers‐Sheedy H, Badawi N, Blair E, et al. (2014) What constitutes cerebral palsy in the twenty‐first century? Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology 56(4): 323-328. |
| [35] | te Velde A, Morgan C, Novak I, et al. (2019) Early Diagnosis and Classification of Cerebral Palsy: An Historical Perspective and Barriers to an Early Diagnosis. Journal of Clinical Medicine 8(10): 1599. |
| [36] | Tessier D, Hefner J and Newmeyer A. (2014) Factors related to psychosocial quality of life for children with cerebral palsy. International journal of pediatrics 2014. |
| [37] | Trabacca A, Vespino T, Di Liddo A, et al. (2016) Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for patients with cerebral palsy: improving long-term care. Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare 9: 455. |
| [38] | Walsh D and Downe S. (2005) Meta‐synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. Journal of advanced nursing 50(2): 204-211. |
| [39] | Zupan A and Jenko M. (2012) Assistive technology for people with cerebral palsy. Eastern Journal of Medicine 17(4): 194-197. |
| [40] | Øien I, Fallang B and Østensjø S. (2016) Everyday use of assistive technology devices in school settings. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 11(8): 630-635. |
APA Style
Hreish, D. (2025). The Perceived Benefits of Assistive Technologies for Children with Cerebral Palsy, Families and Caregivers: A Systematic Review. Rehabilitation Science, 10(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11
ACS Style
Hreish, D. The Perceived Benefits of Assistive Technologies for Children with Cerebral Palsy, Families and Caregivers: A Systematic Review. Rehabil. Sci. 2025, 10(1), 1-15. doi: 10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11,
author = {Dala Hreish},
title = {The Perceived Benefits of Assistive Technologies for Children with Cerebral Palsy, Families and Caregivers: A Systematic Review},
journal = {Rehabilitation Science},
volume = {10},
number = {1},
pages = {1-15},
doi = {10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.rs.20251001.11},
abstract = {Cerebral palsy is a neurodevelopmental condition that occurs pre-birth, during birth or post-birth. It often results in motor impairments and associated challenges that significantly affect functional independence and quality of life. Assistive technologies play a critical role in enhancing function and independence for young people affected by this condition. This systematic review aimed to identify the perceived benefits of such technologies for children with cerebral palsy, their families and caregivers. A systematic search of the literature identified nine articles that met the inclusion criteria. The review used meta-ethnography as its methodology, applying an interpretive approach to translate concepts across studies and generate new insights. Four third-order interpretations were identified. The first was Identity and belonging: enhancing self-esteem, motivation, independence, and improving posture and mobility. The second was Inclusion and participation: children’s willingness, relationships and parents’ perception. The third was Environmental barriers at home and school. And the fourth was Challenges in assistive technology: aesthetics, usability, knowledge gaps and the need for ongoing support. The findings highlight how assistive technologies address both physical and social challenges, improving developmental opportunities and enhancing independence, social participation and quality of life. Tailoring devices to real-world needs and strengthening collaboration among healthcare professionals, educators and families are essential for promoting children’s functional performance, well-being and inclusion in society.},
year = {2025}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - The Perceived Benefits of Assistive Technologies for Children with Cerebral Palsy, Families and Caregivers: A Systematic Review AU - Dala Hreish Y1 - 2025/01/24 PY - 2025 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11 DO - 10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11 T2 - Rehabilitation Science JF - Rehabilitation Science JO - Rehabilitation Science SP - 1 EP - 15 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2637-594X UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.rs.20251001.11 AB - Cerebral palsy is a neurodevelopmental condition that occurs pre-birth, during birth or post-birth. It often results in motor impairments and associated challenges that significantly affect functional independence and quality of life. Assistive technologies play a critical role in enhancing function and independence for young people affected by this condition. This systematic review aimed to identify the perceived benefits of such technologies for children with cerebral palsy, their families and caregivers. A systematic search of the literature identified nine articles that met the inclusion criteria. The review used meta-ethnography as its methodology, applying an interpretive approach to translate concepts across studies and generate new insights. Four third-order interpretations were identified. The first was Identity and belonging: enhancing self-esteem, motivation, independence, and improving posture and mobility. The second was Inclusion and participation: children’s willingness, relationships and parents’ perception. The third was Environmental barriers at home and school. And the fourth was Challenges in assistive technology: aesthetics, usability, knowledge gaps and the need for ongoing support. The findings highlight how assistive technologies address both physical and social challenges, improving developmental opportunities and enhancing independence, social participation and quality of life. Tailoring devices to real-world needs and strengthening collaboration among healthcare professionals, educators and families are essential for promoting children’s functional performance, well-being and inclusion in society. VL - 10 IS - 1 ER -
School of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Brighton, Brighton, United Kingdom
Information