Methods: A total of 600 adults in Seoul and Gyeonggi-do answered a self-administered questionnaire designed to investigate general characteristics, utilization, menu preference, satisfaction, prospection, and improvement of lunchbox, according to the dietary lifestyle. Results: The study subjects were classified into 5 groups: ‘taste seeking group’, ‘safety seeking group’, ‘health seeking group’, ‘economic seeking group’ and ‘convenience seeking group. Considering purchase value of the lunchbox, the ‘taste seeking group’ had a high utilization rate (35.1%) for prices less than 4,000 won (p < 0.05). Lunchboxes were mainly purchased at the lunchbox store (43.3%) and convenience store (37.7%). The important factor that contributed to purchasing a lunchbox was taste (61.3%), which was highest in the ‘taste seeking group’ (p < 0.01). The ‘health seeking group’ showed the highest preference for the low-salt diet lunchbox menu (26.0%) (p < 0.05). The satisfaction of ‘health seeking groups’ was lowest when considering addition of condiments (2.34%), origin of ingredient (2.59%), and provided calorie (2.81%) (p < 0.05). The overall response indicated future use of the lunchbox (69.6%) (p < 0.01); 35.8% respondents recommended the purchase of lunchbox, where convenience of purchase was the highest factor contributing to recommendation (50.2%) (p < 0.05). Conclusions Taken together, our results indicate that taste was emphasized in every group purchasing the lunch box. Convenience of purchase was the highest factor contributing to satisfaction, which was relatively low when considering addition of condiments, nutrition and origin of ingredients. We propose that it is necessary to improve the development of various menus for increasing satisfaction by selecting the right ingredients contributing to good health of the consumer.

Purpose: This study examined the recognition of rehabilitative robots for treatment in physical therapists. Methods: This study surveyed 100 physical therapists in Seoul and Gyeonggi-do using Google Form, an online survey tool. The questionnaire consisted of 21 questions, including eight questions on the general characteristics, 13 questions on the recognition of rehabilitative robots. Results: The general characteristics of the physical therapists showed differences and influences on recognition of rehabilitative robots, and there were statistically significant differences. There were significant differences in the recognition of rehabilitation robots according to general characteristics in gender, age, education degree, type of hospital, average weekly working time, and treatment field. Multiple regression analysis found that gender and the type of hospital influenced the recognition of rehabilitation robots. Conclusion Physical therapists showed differences in recognition of rehabilitative robots according to their general characteristics, and gender and the type of hospital influence the recognition of rehabilitation robots. Sufficient systematic education programs should be provided, and physical therapists require policy adjustments to increase their accessibility to rehabilitation robots through continuing education.

Purpose: This study examined the recognition of rehabilitative robots for treatment in physical therapists. Methods: This study surveyed 100 physical therapists in Seoul and Gyeonggi-do using Google Form, an online survey tool. The questionnaire consisted of 21 questions, including eight questions on the general characteristics, 13 questions on the recognition of rehabilitative robots. Results: The general characteristics of the physical therapists showed differences and influences on recognition of rehabilitative robots, and there were statistically significant differences. There were significant differences in the recognition of rehabilitation robots according to general characteristics in gender, age, education degree, type of hospital, average weekly working time, and treatment field. Multiple regression analysis found that gender and the type of hospital influenced the recognition of rehabilitation robots. Conclusion Physical therapists showed differences in recognition of rehabilitative robots according to their general characteristics, and gender and the type of hospital influence the recognition of rehabilitation robots. Sufficient systematic education programs should be provided, and physical therapists require policy adjustments to increase their accessibility to rehabilitation robots through continuing education.