Using a Minimum Set of Wearable Sensors to Assess Quality of Movement in Stroke Survivors

Wearable sensors and machine learning in post-stroke rehabilitation assessment: A systematic review

“…In this category, systems that aim to quantify the level of correctness in executing the prescribed exercises are identified. Researchers achieved this by using popular post-stroke assessment scoring systems [65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74]:…”

“…It uses a scaling system that ranges from 0 that signifies Does (i.e no attempt with the limb being tested) to 5 that signifies the attempt was made with a normal-appearing movement. Two included studies used the WMFT [65,67,73].…”

“…Over the past few years, effort has been put into developing unobtrusive, effective and objective motion-modeling systems, taking advantage of the progress made in the sensor technology which became more compact and more power-efficient [83]. All the included works utilised IMUs for the data acquisition [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][65][66][67][68][69][70]63,[71][72][73][74]64]. IMUs are devices that combine linear acceleration from accelerometer and the angular turning rates from gyroscopes [84].…”

“…IMUs were chosen for their portability and for their low-costs, but also because they provide accurate modeling of the participant motion. Some studies used individual accelerometers [43,45,53,54,65,67,68,70,71] or gyroscopes [45] while the rest used their combination to give more detailed information. Moreover, IMUs were coupled with different sensors to acquire more information: a barometric pressure sensor to detect changes in altitude [47,48], insole pressure sensors in [55] to measure the force exercised by the feet while performing the activities, flex sensors to measure the amount of deflection or bending while griping objects [68], liquid level detectors in a cup [42] to measure drinking activity and EMG sensors [61,51] to measure the activity of the muscles that can translate as strength.…”

“…Placement of the sensing technology on the body has shown a heterogeneous distribution linked to the different nature of the employed technology and to the purpose for which the monitoring system was designed. Systems that focused on upper-limb rehabilitation used more frequently the wrists [46,49,52,53,58,65,68,69,[71][72][73][74] in twelve studies, arms [43,49,54,58,61,67,69,70,63,64] in ten studies, four studies used forearm [41,66,63,64], three studies used fingers [53,57,68], and hands [42,45,64], and a single study used elbow and shoulder [68]. These placements were targeted to monitor activities that involved using hands.…”