Rehabilitation technology and the reproduction of bodily normality: a critical analysis of robotic gait training in Turkey

Abstract

This paper focuses on rehabilitation technology, more specifically robotic gait training conducted with a device called 'Lokomat' and its impact on the reproduction of bodily normality within the Turkish context. It draws upon an ethnographic study carried out in a major Turkish rehabilitation hospital and the analysis of the Lokomat's media representation in a health-related television programme. Interviews were conducted with 42 persons (11 medical staff, 2 non-medical staff, and 20 current and 9 former patients). The paper argues that the use of technology is shaped by the relevant sociocultural background. This background comprises both the specificities of the Turkish context more generallysuch as its especially unwelcoming environment to the disabled bodyand the discourses on the Lokomat more specifically, which create a miracle image of this device as facilitating walking. Thus, the Lokomat's presence deepens the normal/abnormal divide and reproduces it as walking/non-walking.

Patient, carer, and staff perceptions of robotics in motor rehabilitation: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

“…The 30 included studies (Table 2 ) were published between 2011 and 2020 and were mainly from eight countries: Canada [ 26 , 34 – 40 ], USA [ 28 , 29 , 41 – 45 ], the UK [ 46 – 52 ], Australia [ 53 ], Turkey [ 54 ], Ireland [ 25 ], Germany [ 27 ], and the Netherlands [ 55 ]. One study [ 56 ] took place across various geographical areas (Asia, Australia, Europe and USA), one study [ 57 ] across three countries (Italy, UK, and the Netherlands), whereas another study [ 58 ] mentioned being conducted in three European Union (EU) countries, without specifying the countries.…”

“…Only three studies [ 28 , 34 , 42 ] provided information on the participants’ ethnic background, with participants identifying as White, Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latinx or multiracial. The sample consisted of patients undertaking or who had undertaken in the past robotic therapy (n = 255) [ 25 – 27 , 34 , 35 , 37 , 39 , 41 – 43 , 45 – 49 , 51 , 52 , 54 , 57 , 58 ], parents (n = 11) [ 34 , 39 ] or other carers (n = 8; the paper does not specify the carers’ relationships to the patients) [ 57 ], as well as healthcare professionals (n = 119), including physiotherapists or occupational therapists (n = 108) [ 28 , 29 , 35 , 36 , 38 , 40 , 44 , 46 , 49 , 50 , 53 – 56 , 58 ], doctors (n = 7) [ 54 ], nurses (n = 2) [ 54 ], and non-medical personnel (n = 2) [ 54 ].…”

“…One study included children with cerebral palsy and their parents [ 39 ] and a second study [ 34 ] included only the parents of children with cerebral palsy. The remaining studies included conditions such as shoulder instability or rotator cuff-related pain [ 46 ], neuromuscular conditions [ 48 ], and physical disability through traumatic injury or illness [ 54 ]. Three studies [ 27 , 44 , 56 ] included participants with various reasons for rehabilitation, including stroke, spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, brain haemorrhage, hemiplegia, or any other condition (e.g., accidents, falls, not specified).…”

Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment from the Perspective of the Social Model of Disability: A Teaching Experience

“…The society does not treat disabled citizens as equal partners (Tufan 2008). It provides an unwelcoming environment to the disabled body (Bezmez and Yardımcı 2016). The medical model is dominant (Sakiz and Woods 2014;Sakiz et al 2015).…”

Looking for a ‘cure’: negotiating ‘walking’ in a Turkish rehabilitation hospital

“…To protect anonymity, numbers designate participants, together with the letters D for doctor, PT for physiotherapist, N for nurse, SW for social worker, NmP for non-medical personnel, and P for current/former patient. ethnography did indeed facilitate the exploration of factors significant for a thorough understanding of rehabilitation in Turkey: the vital role of the family through the refakatçi system (Bezmez and Yardımcı 2015b) and medical technology in the form of robotic gait training (Bezmez and Yardımcı 2015a) in constructing meanings of disability during rehabilitation have been analysed elsewhere. Similarly, this article's main research question was addressed not only through interviews, but also through observation, informal/casual conversations, and exploration of the institution's spatial design.…”