A Clinically Relevant Method of Analyzing Continuous Change in Robotic Upper Extremity Chronic Stroke Rehabilitation

Abstract

Background. Robots designed for rehabilitation of the upper extremity after stroke facilitate high rates of repetition during practice of movements and record precise kinematic data, providing a method to investigate motor recovery profiles over time. Objective. To determine how motor recovery profiles during robotic interventions provide insight into improving clinical gains. Methods. A convenience sample (n = 22), from a larger randomized control trial, was taken of chronic stroke participants completing 12 sessions of arm therapy. One group received 60 minutes of robotic therapy (Robot only) and the other group received 45 minutes on the robot plus 15 minutes of translation-to-task practice (Robot + TTT). Movement time was assessed using the robot without powered assistance. Analyses (ANOVA, random coefficient modeling [RCM] with 2-term exponential function) were completed to investigate changes across the intervention, between sessions, and within a session. Results. Significant improvement (P < .05) in movement time across the intervention (pre vs post) was similar between the groups but there were group differences for changes between and within sessions (P < .05). The 2-term exponential function revealed a fast and slow component of learning that described performance across consecutive blocks. The RCM identified individuals who were above or below the marginal model. Conclusions. The expanded analyses indicated that changes across time can occur in different ways but achieve similar goals and may be influenced by individual factors such as initial movement time. These findings will guide decisions regarding treatment planning based on rates of motor relearning during upper extremity stroke robotic interventions.

A robot goes to rehab: a novel gamified system for long-term stroke rehabilitation using a socially assistive robot—methodology and usability testing

“…Following an initial assessment session, patients came to the facility two to three times per week over a period of 5–7 weeks, for a total of 15 therapy sessions with either the Pepper robot or the computer screen. The number of sessions was determined based on previous works [ 50 , 51 ] that described significant clinical change in the arm and hand function of stroke patients following 12–15 sessions, at a frequency of three times per week. Each session lasted between 30 and 50 min, depending on participant's ability, fatigue, etc.…”

In vivo tissue regeneration with robotic implants

“…Clinically-approved robots are available for performing minimally invasive surgical procedures (1,2) and for assisting stroke victims in relearning motor control tasks (3,4). Robotic prostheses have been designed to replace human limbs (5,6) while soft and hard exoskeletons are being developed to enhance human strength and endurance (7,8).…”

The Role of Robotic Path Assistance and Weight Support in Facilitating 3D Movements in Individuals With Poststroke Hemiparesis

“…Ultimately, the goal of training is to restore movement and function without robotic guidance or support, and many new robotic approaches are being designed to provide just-enough support to individuals to facilitate task performance without promoting slacking behavior. [57][58][59][60] Weight support is relatively less expensive to provide compared with robotic path assistance. 61 More important, the effects of weight support on arm movement control suggest that understanding the biomechanical principles underlying antigravity movements of the upper limb are important for overcoming poststroke synergy patterns and restoring movement poststroke.…”