Striking the Balance: Embracing Technology While Upholding Humanistic Principles in Neurorehabilitation.

anthropology biomedical enhancement biomedical technology education humanities medical informatics neurological rehabilitation neurosciences philosophy social sciences sociology and social phenomena category

Journal

Neurorehabilitation and neural repair
ISSN: 1552-6844
Titre abrégé: Neurorehabil Neural Repair
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100892086

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
26 Jul 2024
Historique:
medline: 26 7 2024
pubmed: 26 7 2024
entrez: 26 7 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The rapid advancement of technology-focused strategies in neurorehabilitation has brought optimism to individuals with neurological disorders, caregivers, and physicians while reshaping medical practice and training. We critically examine the implications of technology in neurorehabilitation, drawing on discussions from the 2021 and 2024 World Congress for NeuroRehabilitation. While acknowledging the value of technology, it highlights inherent limitations and ethical concerns, particularly regarding the potential overshadowing of humanistic approaches. The integration of technologies such as robotics, artificial intelligence, neuromodulation, and brain-computer interfaces enriches neurorehabilitation by offering interdisciplinary solutions. However, ethical considerations arise regarding the balance between compensation for deficits, accessibility of technologies, and their alignment with fundamental principles of care. Additionally, the pitfalls of relying solely on neuroimaging data are discussed, stressing the necessity for a more comprehensive understanding of individual variability and clinical skills in rehabilitation. From a clinical perspective, the article advocates for realistic solutions that prioritize individual needs, quality of life, and social inclusion over technological allure. It underscores the importance of modesty and honesty in responding to expectations while emphasizing the uniqueness of each individual's experience. Moreover, it argues for the preservation of human-centric approaches alongside technological advancements, recognizing the invaluable role of clinical observation and human interaction in rehabilitation. Ultimately, the article calls for a balanced attitude that integrates both scientific and humanistic perspectives in neurorehabilitation. It highlights the symbiotic relationship between the sciences and humanities, advocating for philosophical questioning to guide the ethical implementation of new technologies and foster interdisciplinary dialogue.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The rapid advancement of technology-focused strategies in neurorehabilitation has brought optimism to individuals with neurological disorders, caregivers, and physicians while reshaping medical practice and training.
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
We critically examine the implications of technology in neurorehabilitation, drawing on discussions from the 2021 and 2024 World Congress for NeuroRehabilitation. While acknowledging the value of technology, it highlights inherent limitations and ethical concerns, particularly regarding the potential overshadowing of humanistic approaches. The integration of technologies such as robotics, artificial intelligence, neuromodulation, and brain-computer interfaces enriches neurorehabilitation by offering interdisciplinary solutions. However, ethical considerations arise regarding the balance between compensation for deficits, accessibility of technologies, and their alignment with fundamental principles of care. Additionally, the pitfalls of relying solely on neuroimaging data are discussed, stressing the necessity for a more comprehensive understanding of individual variability and clinical skills in rehabilitation.
RESULTS RESULTS
From a clinical perspective, the article advocates for realistic solutions that prioritize individual needs, quality of life, and social inclusion over technological allure. It underscores the importance of modesty and honesty in responding to expectations while emphasizing the uniqueness of each individual's experience. Moreover, it argues for the preservation of human-centric approaches alongside technological advancements, recognizing the invaluable role of clinical observation and human interaction in rehabilitation.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Ultimately, the article calls for a balanced attitude that integrates both scientific and humanistic perspectives in neurorehabilitation. It highlights the symbiotic relationship between the sciences and humanities, advocating for philosophical questioning to guide the ethical implementation of new technologies and foster interdisciplinary dialogue.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39056472
doi: 10.1177/15459683241265887
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

15459683241265887

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Auteurs

Hugo Ardaillon (H)

Service de Médecine Physique et Réadaptation, Plateforme Mouvement et Handicap, Hôpital Henry Gabrielle, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Saint-Genis-Laval, France.
Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, INSERM U1028; CNRS UMR5292; Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Trajectoires Team, Lyon, France.

Shams Ribault (S)

Service de Médecine Physique et Réadaptation, Plateforme Mouvement et Handicap, Hôpital Henry Gabrielle, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Saint-Genis-Laval, France.
Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, INSERM U1028; CNRS UMR5292; Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Trajectoires Team, Lyon, France.
Pathophysiology and Genetics of Neuron and Muscle, CNRS UMR 5261, INSERM U1315, Faculté de Médecine, Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France.

Caroline Herault (C)

Service de Médecine Physique et Réadaptation, Plateforme Mouvement et Handicap, Hôpital Henry Gabrielle, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Saint-Genis-Laval, France.

Laure Pisella (L)

Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, INSERM U1028; CNRS UMR5292; Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Trajectoires Team, Lyon, France.

Nicolas Lechopier (N)

Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, INSERM U1028; CNRS UMR5292; Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Trajectoires Team, Lyon, France.
Sciences et Société ; Historicité, Éducation et Pratiques [S2HEP], Lyon, France.

Karen T Reilly (KT)

Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, INSERM U1028; CNRS UMR5292; Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Trajectoires Team, Lyon, France.

Gilles Rode (G)

Service de Médecine Physique et Réadaptation, Plateforme Mouvement et Handicap, Hôpital Henry Gabrielle, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Saint-Genis-Laval, France.
Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, INSERM U1028; CNRS UMR5292; Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Trajectoires Team, Lyon, France.

Classifications MeSH