背景:以技术为中心的神经康复策略的快速发展给患有神经系统疾病的人带来了乐观,看护者,和医生,同时重塑医疗实践和培训。
目的:我们严格研究技术在神经康复中的意义,借鉴2021年和2024年世界神经康复大会的讨论。在承认技术价值的同时,它强调了固有的局限性和道德问题,特别是关于人文方法的潜在阴影。机器人技术等技术的集成,人工智能,神经调节,和脑机接口丰富了神经康复提供跨学科的解决方案。然而,关于赤字补偿之间的平衡,出现了道德考虑,技术的可及性,以及它们与基本护理原则的一致性。此外,讨论了仅依赖神经影像学数据的陷阱,强调有必要更全面地了解康复中的个体差异和临床技能。
结果:从临床角度来看,这篇文章主张以个人需求为优先考虑的现实解决方案,生活质量,和社会包容而不是技术诱惑。它强调了谦虚和诚实在回应期望中的重要性,同时强调了每个人经验的独特性。此外,它主张保留以人为中心的方法以及技术进步,认识到临床观察和人类互动在康复中的宝贵作用。
结论:最终,文章呼吁在神经康复中采取平衡的态度,将科学和人文观点结合起来。它强调了科学与人文科学之间的共生关系,倡导哲学质疑,以指导新技术的伦理实施,并促进跨学科对话。
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.
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: 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.
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.