2012
DOI: 10.5014/ajot.2012.000943
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of Robotics in Spinal Cord Injury: A Case Report

Abstract: The findings from this case are promising and demonstrate the Reo Go's utility in combination with traditional occupational therapy. However, more research and specific protocols that are easily reproducible with robots such as the Reo Go are needed to validate this evolving treatment area.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
13
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
2
13
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…None of the participants dropped out of the study. Some case reports have described the safety and feasibility of the upper limb robotic training in this population with similar results, high tolerance and no increase in pain or spasticity (Yozbatiran et al, 2012; Sledziewski et al, 2012; Kadivar et al, 2012), using different robotic devices (Armeo, Geo Ro).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…None of the participants dropped out of the study. Some case reports have described the safety and feasibility of the upper limb robotic training in this population with similar results, high tolerance and no increase in pain or spasticity (Yozbatiran et al, 2012; Sledziewski et al, 2012; Kadivar et al, 2012), using different robotic devices (Armeo, Geo Ro).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…Krebs et al, 2008; Sledziewski, Schaaf, & Mount, 2012; Yozbatiran et al, 2012). We proposed that chronic SCI patients with some residual upper-limb function should also be able to improve voluntary motor control with the same robotic upper extremity training.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…12,84,87 It also uses a six-point scale for MMT grading, but instead of isolated muscles, it evaluates muscle groups, which should also be determined by the examiner. 103 Another scale applied to MMT grading is that elaborated by the Medical Research Council, 23,50,79,86 as well as its variation, 83 96,99 Electronic search (n=495) Pubmed 12 MMT Daniels and Worthinghan Gomes-Osman; Field-Fote (2015) 13 Manual dynamometer Average of three repetitions 42 Isokinetic dynamometer three maximum voluntary contractions, with 3 to 6s of duration, and 1 minute of rest between them Sledziewski; Schaaf; Mount (2012) 43 MMT UEMS Alcobendas-Maestro et al (2012) 44 MMT LEMS 101 MMT Brunnstron e Dennen which grades strength on a scale of 0 to 5. It does not define the resistance that must be applied by the examiner at the time of the test, nor does it consider the range of motion developed.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent systematic review of the use of robotics for upper-extremity (UE) motor recovery after stroke determined that equal intensity and duration of robotic therapy shows no greater effectiveness for improving activities of daily living, strength, andmotorcontrolthanconventionaltherapy; however,whentherobotictherapieswereused in addition to conventional therapy, a positive additive effect for UE motor recovery occurred (Norouzi-Gheidari, Archambault, & Fung, 2012). The robotics investigated during the past 5 years included the ReoGo, used to facilitate unilateral UE motor recovery after spinal injury (Sledziewski et al, 2012) and the Bi-Manu-Track, a bimanual UE robotic trainer used to compare the effects of bilateral versus unilateral UE training after stroke (Yang et al, 2012).…”
Section: Populations Studiedmentioning
confidence: 99%