Abstract:The development of full-body exoskeletons has been limited due to design complexities, mechanical integration intricacies, and heavier weight, among others. Consequently, very few full-body powered exoskeletons were developed to address these challenges, in spite of increasing demand for physical assistance at full-body level. This article presents an overall design and development of a powered full-body exoskeleton called “FB-AXO.” Primarily, FB-AXO consists of two main subsystems, a lower-body and an upper-b… Show more
“…Furthermore, it can also provide corresponding training for patients with limb dysfunction to help restore the working ability of their limbs [62]. At present, robotic exoskeletons can be divided into the following four types, according to where they are worn: upper limb robotic exoskeletons [20][21][22][23][24], lower limb robotic exoskeletons [25][26][27][28][29][30], whole body robotic exoskeletons [15], and ground robotic exoskeletons [31,32].…”
Section: Robotic Exoskeletons Provide Site-specific Muscle Trainingmentioning
The increase in the number of elderly patients with degenerative diseases has brought additional medical and financial pressures, which are adding to the burden on society. The development of sports rehabilitation robotics (SRR) is becoming increasingly sophisticated at the technical level of its application; however, few studies have analyzed how it works and how effective it is in aiding rehabilitation, and fewer individualized exercise rehabilitation programs have been developed for elderly patients. The purpose of this study was to analyze the working methods and the effects of different types of SRR and then to suggest the feasibility of applying SRR to enhance the physical abilities of elderly patients with degenerative diseases. The researcher’s team searched 633 English-language journal articles, which had been published over the past five years, and they selected 38 of them for a narrative literature review. Our summary found the following: (1) The current types of SRR are generally classified as end-effector robots, smart walkers, intelligent robotic rollators, and exoskeleton robots—exoskeleton robots were found to be the most widely used. (2) The current working methods include assistant tools as the main intermediaries—i.e., robots assist patients to participate; patients as the main intermediaries—i.e., patients dominate the assistant tools to participate; and sensors as the intermediaries—i.e., myoelectric-driven robots promote patient participation. (3) Better recovery was perceived for elderly patients when using SRR than is generally achieved through the traditional single-movement recovery methods, especially in strength, balance, endurance, and coordination. However, there was no significant improvement in their speed or agility after using SRR.
“…Furthermore, it can also provide corresponding training for patients with limb dysfunction to help restore the working ability of their limbs [62]. At present, robotic exoskeletons can be divided into the following four types, according to where they are worn: upper limb robotic exoskeletons [20][21][22][23][24], lower limb robotic exoskeletons [25][26][27][28][29][30], whole body robotic exoskeletons [15], and ground robotic exoskeletons [31,32].…”
Section: Robotic Exoskeletons Provide Site-specific Muscle Trainingmentioning
The increase in the number of elderly patients with degenerative diseases has brought additional medical and financial pressures, which are adding to the burden on society. The development of sports rehabilitation robotics (SRR) is becoming increasingly sophisticated at the technical level of its application; however, few studies have analyzed how it works and how effective it is in aiding rehabilitation, and fewer individualized exercise rehabilitation programs have been developed for elderly patients. The purpose of this study was to analyze the working methods and the effects of different types of SRR and then to suggest the feasibility of applying SRR to enhance the physical abilities of elderly patients with degenerative diseases. The researcher’s team searched 633 English-language journal articles, which had been published over the past five years, and they selected 38 of them for a narrative literature review. Our summary found the following: (1) The current types of SRR are generally classified as end-effector robots, smart walkers, intelligent robotic rollators, and exoskeleton robots—exoskeleton robots were found to be the most widely used. (2) The current working methods include assistant tools as the main intermediaries—i.e., robots assist patients to participate; patients as the main intermediaries—i.e., patients dominate the assistant tools to participate; and sensors as the intermediaries—i.e., myoelectric-driven robots promote patient participation. (3) Better recovery was perceived for elderly patients when using SRR than is generally achieved through the traditional single-movement recovery methods, especially in strength, balance, endurance, and coordination. However, there was no significant improvement in their speed or agility after using SRR.
“…The tremendous physical demands due to the use of tools and machine tools by workers is another factor that has driven the development and use of exoskeletons to provide the worker with resistance and physical capacity, reducing the impact of disorders derived from the handling of these tools, including situations of work carried out at height [16,17].…”
This review aims to characterize the current landscape of exoskeletons designed to promote medical care and occupational safety in industrial settings. Extensive exploration of scientific databases spanning industries, health, and medicine informs the classification of exoskeletons according to their distinctive attributes and specific footholds on the human physique. Within the scope of this review, a comprehensive analysis is presented, contextualizing the integration of exoskeletons based on different work activities. The reviewers extracted the most relevant articles published between 2008 and 2023 from IEEE, Proquest, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, and other databases. In this review, the PRISMA-ScR checklist was used, and a Cohen’s kappa coefficient of 0.642 was applied, implying moderate agreement among the reviewers; 75 primary studies were extracted from a total of 344. The future of exoskeletons in contributing to occupational health and safety will depend on continued collaboration between researchers, designers, healthcare professionals, and industries. With the continued development of technologies and an increasing understanding of how these devices interact with the human body, exoskeletons will likely remain valuable for improving working conditions and safety in various work environments.
“…Moreover, regarding the type of actuation, both active and passive exosuits have been developed in the past for industrial and professional use (de Looze et al, 2016 ; Toxiri et al, 2019 ). However, in the current scenario, with active devices being limited by available actuator options, multi-faceted control schemes and power supplies (Wolff et al, 2014 ; Christensen et al, 2021 ), passive devices have attracted particular attention in terms of practical utility. These reasons make passive exosuits a more practical solution for load lifting applications (Bosch et al, 2016 ; Goršič et al, 2021 ).…”
Passive exosuits have been vastly researched in the past decade for lifting tasks to alleviate the mechanical loading on the spine and reduce the lower back muscle activities in lifting tasks. Despite promising advantages of exosuits, factors such as comfort directly influence the user’s acceptability of such body-worn devices. Exosuits’ routing/anchoring points, which transmit device-to-body forces, remain the leading cause of discomfort among users. In the present study, we sought to investigate the effect of the routing element, that is, the “moment arm,” in altering the device-to-body forces and perceived discomfort. We first presented a simplified human–exosuit model to establish insight into the effect of the moment arm on the device-to-body forces acting at the shoulder (FS) and waist (FW). Further, an experimental investigation was conducted on 10 participants with six different exosuit moment arm configurations (C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, and C6) to investigate their effect on the device-to-body forces, perceived discomfort, and muscle activity using a passive back-assist exosuit emulator in a lifting/lowering task. Configuration C4 was found to be most beneficial in reducing device-to-body forces at the shoulder and waist by up to 44.6 and 22.2%, respectively, during lifting. Subjective scores also comprehended with the device-to-body forces, indicating that C4 produces significantly less discomfort for participants. The outcome of the study illustrates the importance of selecting an appropriate moment arm configuration for passive back support exosuits in alleviating the device-to-body forces and perceived discomfort.
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.