Subjective responses on the performance of the redesigned CPM machine
| No. of responses (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
| Usability dimensions | ||||
| Ease of use | 15 (37.5%) | 22 (55.0%) | 3 (7.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Pictorial instruction | 8 (20.0%) | 27 (67.5%) | 5 (12.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Appropriate commanding | 19 (47.5%) | 19 (47.5%) | 2 (5.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Correct commanding | 24 (60.0%) | 12 (30.0%) | 4 (10.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Functionality dimensions | ||||
| Smooth operation | 21 (52.5%) | 17 (42.5%) | 2 (5.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Noise level | 18 (45.0%) | 19 (47.5%) | 3 (7.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Safety usage | 21 (52.5%) | 14 (35.0%) | 5 (12.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Body structure dimensions | ||||
| Aesthetics | 11 (27.5%) | 21 (52.5%) | 8 (20.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Size | 17 (42.5%) | 19 (47.5%) | 4 (10.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Overall satisfaction | 19 (47.5%) | 20 (50.0%) | 1 (2.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Average | 43.30% | 47.50% | 9.20% | 0% |
| No. of responses (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |
| Ease of use | 15 (37.5%) | 22 (55.0%) | 3 (7.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Pictorial instruction | 8 (20.0%) | 27 (67.5%) | 5 (12.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Appropriate commanding | 19 (47.5%) | 19 (47.5%) | 2 (5.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Correct commanding | 24 (60.0%) | 12 (30.0%) | 4 (10.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Smooth operation | 21 (52.5%) | 17 (42.5%) | 2 (5.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Noise level | 18 (45.0%) | 19 (47.5%) | 3 (7.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Safety usage | 21 (52.5%) | 14 (35.0%) | 5 (12.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Aesthetics | 11 (27.5%) | 21 (52.5%) | 8 (20.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Size | 17 (42.5%) | 19 (47.5%) | 4 (10.0%) | 0 (0%) |
| Overall satisfaction | 19 (47.5%) | 20 (50.0%) | 1 (2.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| Average | 43.30% | 47.50% | 9.20% | 0% |