Narrative reflection written by Bailey DeCocco – Integrating Engineering, Technology, and Rehabilitation – Spring 2025

Before this class, I had never experienced a clinical interview. All of my past class interviews had been focused only on technical aspects of device development. John was the first person I had ever spoken to that had experienced a stroke and I had the opportunity to ask questions about it. At first, I felt a bit uncomfortable with the idea of asking someone about their medical history and health experiences since that was not a conversation I had before. Going in, I was anticipating the conversation to be awkward, and for Johns answers to feel somewhat reserved since he was discussing his medical history with new people. However, this was not my experience at all. From the start, John was extremely conversational, and he answered all of our questions openly and passionately. He provided details about important aspects of his life and stroke experience such as how his wife is his main caregiver, how they have added bars and other adaptations to rooms in their house, as well as how he struggled with mental health after being let go from his job because he could no longer perform the tasks he could pre-stroke. Throughout our conversation I found myself having thoughts that bounced between working to better understand someone who was having a human experience that was unique to my own while simultaneously considering adaptive technology. This experience was a good reminder that these conversations are necessary because when I am developing technology, I am doing it for a reason, such as for a group of people whose quality of life could potentially be increased by the work being done. Medical device development isn’t just about solving a problem that has little solutions on the market- it’s about solving the problem that affects actual people. I think this interaction helped me learn how to be more emotionally engaged in the human experience and motivated in the work I wish to do beyond what I originally had been.

Seeing John’s resilience and positivity regarding overcoming the remaining physical symptoms from his stroke was inspiring because I found myself considering how challenging it could be to remain as motivated and active as John does. John not only maintains an active cycling lifestyle but also has an active presence giving back to his community. He acts as a volunteer for an adaptive golf club, where he acts as a caddy for players, as well as is a member of a stroke support group. I feel like it is often easy to lose sight of the things in our lives that we should be grateful for, and I perceived John as someone who is able to look at life in a positive way. He was very excited to share his experience witnessing the use of the Paragolfer, a mobility golf cart that allows users with impaired mobility to be put into a standing golf stance. This was a brand-new technology that I had never heard of before, but I was excited to do more research on. Throughout high school, I acted as a volunteer for STRIDE tennis which is an adaptive sports program. After learning about the Paragolfer it made me think about this experience and how primary wheelchair users often struggled with moving and positioning themselves in time to hit the ball. I wondered if it would be possible for a technology like the Paragolfer to be developed that offered power wheelchair movement but also had a standing brace. I considered how there were already standing power wheelchairs, but using my knowledge of tennis I felt like the arms range of motion needed for hitting the ball properly could potentially be hindered by the backing on these wheelchairs.

During our interviews he often expressed how throughout his life post stroke, there were many doctors who tried to tell him what his limitations would be. His response to these conversations was “do not let anyone tell you what you are and are not capable of doing”. As a woman in engineering, I resonated deeply with that because there have been times when my or my fellow women in engineering’s opinions were dismissed without being considered and we had to assert ourselves again. This reminded me that although we may all be experiencing different challenging circumstances in life, many of the same principles of how we move forward from them can be applied. I believe this idea of interrelatedness is what Dr. Blanton’s statement of “the gift we get back from interacting with [our clients]” was referring to.

At the end of this class, I learned about the different terminology that can be used when discussing these interviews and how not to dehumanize the people we interview or work with who have had different medical experiences. Dr. Ting mentioned using “people with lived experiences” rather than “patients” and this was another eye-opening part of class. I appreciated Dr. Ting’s mention of this terminology because it was not something I had ever heard before and it was a good reminder that we are all just human, regardless of any medical differences we may have. In the future when I work on new projects or conduct interviews, I will ensure research is done ahead of time on how I can do my part to use proper terminology. I feel more educated moving forward and more confident in being able to conduct interviews. If I were to conduct an interview in the future, I would also approach it less technically- by focusing more on the personal aspects of my interviewees first such as how their medical experiences have affected their mental health, or relationships with other people. This information gives insight into just how affected a person is by their experiences and how it can be a driving force in my own understanding of the criticality of developing a technology that has compassion towards the user in mind.