In this study, our goal was to improve the standing balance of people with a spinal cord injury by using a wearable exoskeleton that has ankle and knee actuation in the sagittal plane.Three test-pilots that have an incomplete spinal cord injury wore the exoskeleton and tried to maintain standing balance without stepping while receiving anteroposterior pushes. Two balance controllers were tested: one providing assistance based on the subject's body sway and one based on the whole body momentum. For both controllers, the balance performances of the test-pilots wearing the exoskeleton were assessed based on the center of mass kinematics and compared to the condition in which the device did not provide any assistance.One of the test-pilots was not able to maintain balance without assistance, but could withstand small pushes when any of the balance controllers was implemented. For this test-pilot the recovery time and sway amplitude hardly varied with the type of balance controller that was used. For the other two testpilots the recovery time and the sway amplitude were smallest using the body sway controller.In conclusion, the wearable exoskeleton with balance controller was able to improve the balance performance of the test-pilots by reducing the recovery time after a perturbation and by enabling one of the test-pilots to maintain balance, who could not maintain balance by himself.
Overground powered lower limb exoskeletons (EXOs) have proven to be valid devices in gait rehabilitation in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Although several articles have reported the effects of EXOs in these individuals, the few reviews available focused on specific domains, mainly walking. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a general overview of the effects of commercial EXOs (i.e. not EXOs used in military and industry applications) for medical purposes in individuals with SCI. This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and it referred to MED-LINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Cochrane library databases. The studies included were Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) and non-RCT based on EXOs intervention on individuals with SCI. Out of 1296 studies screened, 41 met inclusion criteria. Among all the EXO studies, the Ekso device was the most discussed, followed by ReWalk, Indego, HAL and Rex devices. Since 14 different domains were considered, the outcome measures were heterogeneous. The most investigated domain was walking, followed by cardiorespiratory/metabolic responses, spasticity, balance, quality of life, human–robot interaction, robot data, bowel functionality, strength, daily living activity, neurophysiology, sensory function, bladder functionality and body composition/bone density domains. There were no reports of negative effects due to EXOs trainings and most of the significant positive effects were noted in the walking domain for Ekso, ReWalk, HAL and Indego devices. Ekso studies reported significant effects due to training in almost all domains, while this was not the case with the Rex device. Not a single study carried out on sensory functions or bladder functionality reached significance for any EXO. It is not possible to draw general conclusions about the effects of EXOs usage due to the lack of high-quality studies as addressed by the Downs and Black tool, the heterogeneity of the outcome measures, of the protocols and of the SCI epidemiological/neurological features. However, the strengths and weaknesses of EXOs are starting to be defined, even considering the different types of adverse events that EXO training brought about. EXO training showed to bring significant improvements over time, but whether its effectiveness is greater or less than conventional therapy or other treatments is still mostly unknown. High-quality RCTs are necessary to better define the pros and cons of the EXOs available today. Studies of this kind could help clinicians to better choose the appropriate training for individuals with SCI.
Background Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) promote upper limb recovery in stroke patients reinforcing motor related brain activity (from electroencephalogaphy, EEG). Hybrid BCIs which include peripheral signals (electromyography, EMG) as control features could be employed to monitor post-stroke motor abnormalities. To ground the use of corticomuscular coherence (CMC) as a hybrid feature for a rehabilitative BCI, we analyzed high-density CMC networks (derived from multiple EEG and EMG channels) and their relation with upper limb motor deficit by comparing data from stroke patients with healthy participants during simple hand tasks. Methods EEG (61 sensors) and EMG (8 muscles per arm) were simultaneously recorded from 12 stroke (EXP) and 12 healthy participants (CTRL) during simple hand movements performed with right/left (CTRL) and unaffected/affected hand (EXP, UH/AH). CMC networks were estimated for each movement and their properties were analyzed by means of indices derived ad-hoc from graph theory and compared among groups. Results Between-group analysis showed that CMC weight of the whole brain network was significantly reduced in patients during AH movements. The network density was increased especially for those connections entailing bilateral non-target muscles. Such reduced muscle-specificity observed in patients was confirmed by muscle degree index (connections per muscle) which indicated a connections’ distribution among non-target and contralateral muscles and revealed a higher involvement of proximal muscles in patients. CMC network properties correlated with upper-limb motor impairment as assessed by Fugl-Meyer Assessment and Manual Muscle Test in patients. Conclusions High-density CMC networks can capture motor abnormalities in stroke patients during simple hand movements. Correlations with upper limb motor impairment support their use in a BCI-based rehabilitative approach.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.