Effects of robot-assisted training on upper limb functional recovery during the rehabilitation of poststroke patients

Abstract

The findings show the benefits of robot therapy in two areas of functional recovery. Task-oriented robotic training in rehabilitation setting facilitates recovery not only of the motor function of the paretic arm but also of the cognitive abilities in stroke patients.

Robot‐assisted therapy for upper‐limb rehabilitation in subacute stroke patients: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…All studies offered RT through a single robot device, except Hesse et al (Hesse et al., 2014) in which the participants received training of finger, wrist, forearm, and shoulder by six different robotic devices. Of the included studies, RT targeted different areas of the upper limb, including wrist and hand only (Dehem et al., 2019; Orihuela‐Espina et al, 2016; Stinear et al., 2014; Villafane et al., 2018; Wolf et al., 2015), the whole upper limb (elbow, foreman, wrist, and hand) (Barker et al., 2017; Daunoraviciene et al., 2018; Masiero et al., 2014), shoulder, and elbow only (Sale et al., 2014), the whole upper limb plus shoulder (Hesse et al., 2014; Volpe et al., 2000). The mean attrition rate was 10.5% (range = 0%–28.9%).…”

“…Motor control was measured by the Fugl‐Meyer Assessment (FMA) (Daunoraviciene et al., 2018; Sale et al., 2014; Wolf et al., 2015) and its related scales, including the FMA‐motor (Hesse et al., 2014), the FMA for shoulder/elbow and coordination (FMA‐SEC) (Volpe et al., 2000) and the FMA for wrist and hand function (FMA‐WH) (Orihuela‐Espina et al, 2016). Functional independence was measured by the Functional Independence Measures (FIM)‐self‐care domain (Daunoraviciene et al., 2018), the FIM‐motor (Volpe et al., 2000), the FIM‐cognition (Volpe et al., 2000), the Barthel Index (BI) (Hesse et al., 2014) and the Activlim questionnaire (Dehem et al., 2019). Of the included RCTs, three applied the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) (Hesse et al., 2014; Stinear et al., 2014; Wolf et al., 2015), two used the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) (Wolf et al., 2015) and one used QuickDASH (Villafane et al., 2018) to assess upper extremity performance; six used the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) to assess muscle tone (Barker et al., 2017; Daunoraviciene et al., 2018; Hesse et al., 2014; Masiero et al., 2014; Sale et al., 2014; Villafane et al., 2018); and three used the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) to measure quality of life (Barker et al., 2017; Dehem et al., 2019; Stinear et al., 2014).…”

“…At post‐treatment, the overall effect of RT for improving motor control was insignificant when compared to usual care (SMD = 0.18, 95%CI −0.16, 0.51 , p = .31, 5 RCTs, 274 participants) (see Figure 4). As shown in the SoF, the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach was downgraded from high to low (2 points) because two of the pooled studies were considered at high risk of bias (Daunoraviciene et al., 2018; Hesse et al., 2014), and the pooled effect was based on wide 95% confidence interval (see Appendix S3) (Daunoraviciene et al., 2018; Dehem et al., 2019; Hesse et al., 2014; Sale et al., 2014; Wolf et al., 2015). Hesse et al.…”

“…Seven studies integrated RT with usual care and the time spent for RT in proportion to the whole treatment varied from 25%-50% (Barker et al, 2017;Dehem et al, 2019;Hesse et al, 2014;Masiero et al, 2014;Stinear et al, 2014;Villafane et al, 2018;Wolf et al, 2015). The remaining four studies provided RT as a stand-alone treatment (Daunoraviciene et al, 2018;Orihuela-Espina et al, 2016;Sale et al, 2014;Volpe et al, 2000). Hesse et al, 2014;Masiero et al, 2014;Orihuela-Espina et al, 2016;Sale et al, 2014;Stinear et al, 2014;Villafane et al, 2018;Wolf et al, 2015).…”

Intelligent Medical Rehabilitation Training Instrument Based on Movement Coordination

“…Because biofeedback technology has the advantages of no damage, no pain, no drug side effects, simple methods, and obvious reduction of the huge economic and social burden caused by disease prevention, it has been valued by many countries. The rapid development of cognitive neurobiology [19], [20] has obviously promoted the research and understanding of the biofeedback technology mechanism, significantly improved the healing effect of the biofeedback technology for stroke, and provided new ideas and benefits for the treatment of stroke. prospect.…”