Robotics in Health Care: Perspectives of Robot-Aided Interventions in Clinical Practice for Rehabilitation of Upper Limbs
Source abstract
Abstract
Robot-aided systems to support the physical rehabilitation of individuals with neurological impairment is one of the fields that has been widely developed in the last few decades. However, the adoption of these systems in clinical practice remains limited. In order to better understanding the causes of this limitation, a systematic review of robot-based systems focused on upper extremity rehabilitation is presented in this paper. A systematic search and review of related articles in the literature were conducted. The chosen works were analyzed according to the type of device, the data analysis capability, the therapy method, the human–robot interaction, the safety strategies, and the focus of treatment. As a conclusion, self-adaptation for personalizing the treatments, safeguarding and enhancing of patient–robot interaction towards training essential factors of movement generation into the same paradigm, or the use of lifelike environments in fully-immersive virtual reality for increasing the assimilation of motor gains could be relevant factors to develop more accepted robot-aided systems in clinical practice.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery · Muscle activation and electromyography studies · Botulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Systems Engineering and Automation, University Carlos III of Madrid, Avda. de la Universidad 30, 28911 Leganés, Spain
Funding
Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad, Gobierno de España · RoboCity2030-DIH-CM Madrid Robotics Digital Innovation Hub
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. World Health Organization (2006). Neurological Disorders: Public Health Challenges, WHO Press. Available online: http://www.who.int/mental_health/neurology/neurodiso/en/.
2. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders during 1990–2015: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 201510.1016/S1474-4422(17)30299-5 ↗
3. Global, regional, and national burden of Parkinson’s disease, 1990–2016: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 201610.1016/S1474-4422(18)30295-3 ↗
4. Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations (2017). World Population Ageing 2017, United Nations. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/theme/aging/WPA2017.asp.
5. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 201610.1016/S0140-6736(17)32154-2 ↗
6. Innovating With Rehabilitation Technology in the Real World: Promises, Potentials, and Perspectives10.1097/PHM.0000000000000799 ↗
7. Siciliano, B., and Khatib, O. (2016). Rehabilitation and Health Care Robotics, Springer International Publishing. Springer Handbook of Robotics.10.1007/978-3-319-32552-1 ↗
8. Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke10.1056/NEJMoa0911341 ↗
9. Effects of robot-assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: A systematic review10.1177/1545968307305457 ↗
10. Effects of robot-assisted therapy on stroke rehabilitation in upper limbs: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature10.1682/JRRD.2010.10.0210 ↗
11. Effects of Robot-Assisted Therapy for the Upper Limb After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis10.1177/1545968316666957 ↗
12. A review of robotics in neurorehabilitation: Towards an automated process for upper limb
13. Recent developments in biofeedback for neuromotor rehabilitation10.1186/1743-0003-3-11 ↗
14. Robotic technologies and rehabilitation: New tools for stroke patients’ therapy10.1155/2013/153872 ↗
15. Technology-assisted training of arm-hand skills in stroke: Concepts on reacquisition of motor control and therapist guidelines for rehabilitation technology design10.1186/1743-0003-6-1 ↗
16. Díaz, I., Gil, J.J., and Sánchez, E. (2011). Lower-limb robotic rehabilitation: Literature review and challenges. J. Robot., 759764.10.1155/2011/759764 ↗
17. Review of robot-assisted gait rehabilitation after stroke
18. Qian, Z., and Bi, Z. (2015). Recent development of rehabilitation robots. Adv. Mech. Eng., 7.10.1155/2014/563062 ↗
19. Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury10.1186/1743-0003-6-20 ↗
20. Review of assistive strategies in powered lower-limb orthoses and exoskeletons10.1016/j.robot.2014.09.032 ↗
21. Training modalities in robot-mediated upper limb rehabilitation in stroke: A framework for classification based on a systematic review10.1186/1743-0003-11-111 ↗
22. Application of BCI systems in neurorehabilitation: A scoping review10.3109/17483107.2014.961569 ↗
23. Brain-computer interfaces for post-stroke motor rehabilitation: A meta-analysis10.1002/acn3.544 ↗
24. A review: Motor rehabilitation after stroke with control based on human intent10.1177/0954411918755828 ↗
25. Principles of neurological rehabilitation10.1136/jnnp.74.suppl_4.iv3 ↗
26. Shumway-Cook, A., and Woollacott, M.H. (2007). Motor Control: Translating Research into Clinical Practice, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. [4 ed.].
27. Donaghy, M. (2009). Principles of neurological rehabilitation. Brain’s Diseases of the Nervous System, Oxford University Press. [12th ed.]. Chapter 6.
28. Task-specific training: Evidence for and translation to clinical practice10.1002/oti.275 ↗
29. The Partnership for Robotics in Europe SPARC (2015). Robotics 2020 Multi-Annual Roadmap, SPARC. Call 2 ICT24 (2015)—Horizon 2020.
30. International Organization for Standardization (2018, February 01). ISO 8549-1:1989. Prosthetics and orthotics. Vocabulary Part 1: General Terms for External Limb Prostheses and External Orthoses. Available online: http://www.iso.org/iso/home.htm.
31. Ottobock (2019, February 01). Ottobock North America Consumer Home | Ottobock US. Available online: http://www.ottobockus.com/.
32. Robotics for medical applications10.1109/100.540149 ↗
33. Brown University (2019, February 01). Neuromotor Prosthetics. Available online: http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BI108/BI108_2002_Groups/neuromotor/webpage/Index.htm.
34. Electronic bypass of spinal lesions: Activation of lower motor neurons directly driven by cortical neural signals10.1186/1743-0003-11-107 ↗
35. An implantable neural sensing microsystem with fiber-optic data transmission and power delivery10.3390/s130506014 ↗
36. Techniques and devices to restore cognition10.1016/j.bbr.2008.04.007 ↗
37. Rehabilitation Engineering Laboratory (2019, June 10). Tenoexo: Robotic Hand Orthosis for Therapy and Assistance in Activities of Daily Living. Available online: https://relab.ethz.ch/research/current-research-projects/robotic-hand-orthosis-for-therapy-and-assistance-in-activities-of-daily-living.html.
38. Hocoma (2019, June 10). Armeo Therapy Concept. Available online: https://www.hocoma.com/solutions/arm-hand/.
39. Huo, W., Huang, J., Wang, Y., Wu, J., and Cheng, L. (2011, January 9–13). Control of upper-limb power-assist exoskeleton based on motion intention recognition. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Shanghai, China.
40. Khan, A.M., Yun, D.w., Han, J.S., Shin, K., and Han, C.S. (2014, January 25–29). Upper extremity assist exoskeleton robot. Proceedings of the 2014 RO-MAN: The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Edinburgh, UK.10.1109/ROMAN.2014.6926366 ↗
41. Wang, S., van Dijk, W., and van der Kooij, H. (July, January 29). Spring uses in exoskeleton actuation design. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), Zurich, Switzerland.
42. Noda, T., Teramae, T., Ugurlu, B., and Morimoto, J. (2014, January 14–18). Development of an upper limb exoskeleton powered via pneumatic electric hybrid actuators with bowden cable. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2014), Chicago, IL, USA.10.1109/IROS.2014.6943062 ↗
43. NEUROExos: A powered elbow exoskeleton for physical rehabilitation10.1109/TRO.2012.2211492 ↗
44. Yang, J., Shi, J., and Xie, H. (2015, January 8–12). Research on SMA actuated tendon driven hand exoskeleton with bidirectional finger joint motion coupling for rehabilitation usage. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Cyber Technology in Automation, Control, and Intelligent Systems (CYBER), Shenyang, China.10.1109/CYBER.2015.7287959 ↗
45. Tang, T., Zhang, D., Xie, T., and Zhu, X. (2013, January 12–14). An exoskeleton system for hand rehabilitation driven by shape memory alloy. Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Shenzhen, China.10.1109/ROBIO.2013.6739553 ↗
46. Bionik (2019, June 10). InMotion Interactive Therapy. Available online: https://www.bioniklabs.com/products/inmotion-arm.
47. Towards an Affordable Assistive Device for Personal Autonomy Recovery in Tasks Required of Manual Dexterity10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2834377 ↗
48. Baker, M., McDonough, M., McMullin, E., Swift, M., and BuSha, B. (2011, January 1–3). Orthotic hand-assistive exoskeleton. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 37th Annual Northeast Bioengineering Conference (NEBEC), Troy, NY, USA.10.1109/NEBC.2011.5778523 ↗
49. Design and characterization of a lightweight and fully portable remote actuation system for use with a hand exoskeleton10.1109/LRA.2016.2528296 ↗
50. Impairment-Based 3-D Robotic Intervention Improves Upper Extremity Work Area in Chronic Stroke: Targeting Abnormal Joint Torque Coupling with Progressive Shoulder Abduction Loading10.1109/TRO.2009.2017111 ↗
51. Ellis, M.D., Kottink, A.I., Prange, G.B., Rietman, J.S., Buurke, J.H., and Dewald, J.P. (September, January 30). Quantifying loss of independent joint control in acute stroke with a robotic evaluation of reaching workspace. Proceedings of the 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Boston, MA, USA.10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6091940 ↗
52. Ellis, M.D., Sukal, T., DeMott, T., and Dewald, J.P. (2007, January 12–15). ACT 3D exercise targets gravity-induced discoordination and improves reaching work area in individuals with stroke. Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE 10th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.10.1109/ICORR.2007.4428529 ↗
53. Robot-assisted reaching exercise promotes arm movement recovery in chronic hemiparetic stroke: A randomized controlled pilot study10.1186/1743-0003-3-12 ↗
54. Robot-assisted movement training for the stroke-impaired arm: Does it matter what the robot does?10.1682/JRRD.2005.03.0056 ↗
55. Guidance-based quantification of arm impairment following brain injury: A pilot study10.1109/86.750543 ↗
56. Self-adaptive robot training of stroke survivors for continuous tracking movements10.1186/1743-0003-7-13 ↗
57. Braccio di Ferro: A new haptic workstation for neuromotor rehabilitation10.3233/THC-2006-14301 ↗
58. Adaptive training algorithm for robot-assisted upper-arm rehabilitation, applicable to individualised and therapeutic human-robot interaction10.1186/1743-0003-10-102 ↗
59. Chemuturi, R., Amirabdollahian, F., and Dautenhahn, K. (2012, January 8–9). A study to understand lead-lag performance of subject vs rehabilitation system. Proceedings of the 3rd Augmented Human International Conference, Megeve, France.10.1145/2160125.2160128 ↗
60. Kinematic robot-based evaluation scales and clinical counterparts to measure upper limb motor performance in patients with chronic stroke10.1177/1545968309343214 ↗
61. Learning, not adaptation, characterizes stroke motor recovery: evidence from kinematic changes induced by robot-assisted therapy in trained and untrained task in the same workspace10.1109/TNSRE.2011.2175008 ↗
62. Jackson, A., Culmer, P., Levesley, M., Makower, S., Cozens, J., and Bhakta, B. (July, January 27). Effector force requirements to enable robotic systems to provide assisted exercise in people with upper limb impairment after stroke. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Zurich, Switzerland.10.1109/ICORR.2011.5975391 ↗
63. A proof of concept study investigating the feasibility of combining iPAM robot assisted rehabilitation with functional electrical stimulation to deliver whole arm exercise in stroke survivors10.3109/03091902.2015.1088094 ↗
64. Robotic techniques for upper limb evaluation and rehabilitation of stroke patients10.1109/TNSRE.2005.848352 ↗
65. Micera, S., Sergi, P.N., Zaccone, F., Cappiello, G., Carrozza, M.C., Dario, P., Guglielmelli, E., Colombo, R., Pisano, F., and Minuco, G. (2006, January 20–22). A low-cost biomechatronic system for the restoration and assessment of upper limb motor function in hemiparetic subjects. Proceedings of the First IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, BioRob 2006, Pisa, Italy.
66. Comparison of exercise training effect with different robotic devices for upper limb rehabilitation: A retrospective study10.23736/S1973-9087.16.04297-0 ↗
67. MIME robotic device for upper-limb neurorehabilitation in subacute stroke subjects: A follow-up study10.1682/JRRD.2005.02.0044 ↗
68. Robot-assisted upper-limb therapy in acute rehabilitation setting following stroke: Department of Veterans Affairs multisite clinical trial10.1682/JRRD.2010.04.0062 ↗
69. Design, implementation and clinical tests of a wire-based robot for neurorehabilitation10.1109/TNSRE.2007.908560 ↗
70. Upper-limb robot-assisted therapy in rehabilitation of acute stroke patients: Focused review and results of new randomized controlled trial10.1682/JRRD.2010.04.0063 ↗
71. Randomized Trial of a Robotic Assistive Device for the Upper Extremity During Early Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation10.1177/1545968313513073 ↗
72. Rosati, G., Masiero, S., and Rossi, A. (2017). On the use of cable-driven robots in early inpatient stroke rehabilitation. Advances in Italian Mechanism Science, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-48375-7_59 ↗
73. Exercising daily living activities in robot-mediated therapy10.1589/jpts.29.854 ↗
74. Hand robotics rehabilitation: Feasibility and preliminary results of a robotic treatment in patients with hemiparesis
75. Individual finger synchronized robot-assisted hand rehabilitation in subacute to chronic stroke: A prospective randomized clinical trial of efficacy10.1177/0269215511431473 ↗
76. Huang, X., Naghdy, F., Du, H., Naghdy, G., and Todd, C. (2015, January 21–23). Reinforcement learning neural network (RLNN) based adaptive control of fine hand motion rehabilitation robot. Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Conference on Control Applications (CCA), Sydney, Australia.10.1109/CCA.2015.7320733 ↗
77. Robot-assisted arm trainer for the passive and active practice of bilateral forearm and wrist movements in hemiparetic subjects10.1016/S0003-9993(02)04954-7 ↗
78. Schmidt, H., Hesse, S., Werner, C., and Bardeleben, A. (2004, January 1–4). Upper and lower extremity robotic devices to promote motor recovery after stroke -recent developments. Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1109/IEMBS.2004.1404335 ↗
79. Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke10.1682/JRRD.2005.04.0076 ↗
80. Takahashi, C.D., Der-Yeghiaian, L., Le, V.H., and Cramer, S.C. (July, January 28). A robotic device for hand motor therapy after stroke. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, ICORR 2005, Chicago, IL, USA.
81. Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke10.1093/brain/awm311 ↗
82. Assessment of the Efficacy of ReoGo-J Robotic training against other rehabilitation therapies for Upper-Limb Hemiplegia after Stroke: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial10.3389/fneur.2018.00730 ↗
83. Compensating the effects of FES-induced muscle fatigue by rehabilitation robotics during arm weight support10.1515/cdbme-2017-0007 ↗
84. A new approach for a patient-cooperative upper limb fes support based on vector fields10.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.1573 ↗
85. Passon, A., Seel, T., Massmann, J., Schauer, T., and Freernan, C. (2018, January 1–5). Iterative learning vector field for FES-supported cyclic upper limb movements in combination with robotic weight compensation. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Madrid, Spain.10.1109/IROS.2018.8594120 ↗
86. Johnson, M., Wisneski, K., Anderson, J., Nathan, D., and Smith, R. (2006, January 20–22). Development of ADLER: The activities of daily living exercise robot. Proceedings of the First IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, BioRob 2006, Pisa, Italy.
87. Johnson, M.J., Wisneski, K.J., Anderson, J., Nathan, D., Strachota, E., Kosasih, J., Johnston, J., and Smith, R.O. (2007). Task-oriented and purposeful robot-assisted therapy. Rehabilitation Robotics, IntechOpen.
88. Nathan, D.E., Johnson, M.J., and McGuire, J. (2008, January 19–22). Feasibility of integrating FES grasp assistance with a task-oriented robot-assisted therapy environment: A case study. Proceedings of the 2008 2nd IEEE RAS & EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.10.1109/BIOROB.2008.4762928 ↗
89. Montagner, A., Frisoli, A., Borelli, L., Procopio, C., Bergamasco, M., Carboncini, M.C., and Rossi, B. (2007, January 27–29). A pilot clinical study on robotic assisted rehabilitation in VR with an arm exoskeleton device. Proceedings of the 2007 Virtual Rehabilitation, Venice, Italy.10.1109/ICVR.2007.4362131 ↗
90. Robotic assisted rehabilitation in virtual reality with the L-EXOS
91. Frisoli, A., Chisari, C., Sotgiu, E., Procopio, C., Fontana, M., Rossi, B., and Bergamasco, M. (2012, January 12–15). Rehabilitation training and evaluation with the L-EXOS in chronic stroke. Proceedings of the International Conference on Smart Homes and Health Telematics, Artiminio, Italy.10.1007/978-3-642-30779-9_35 ↗
92. Portable upper extremity robotics is as efficacious as upper extremity rehabilitative therapy: A randomized controlled pilot trial10.1177/0269215512464795 ↗
93. Combined Clinic-Home Approach for Upper Limb Robotic Therapy after Stroke: A Pilot Study10.1016/j.apmr.2015.06.019 ↗
94. Case report on the use of a custom myoelectric elbow–wrist–hand orthosis for the remediation of upper extremity paresis and loss of function in chronic stroke10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00399 ↗
95. Passive exoskeletons for assisting limb movement10.1682/JRRD.2005.04.0070 ↗
96. Ragonesi, D., Agrawal, S., Sample, W., and Rahman, T. (September, January 30). Series elastic actuator control of a powered exoskeleton. Proceedings of the 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Boston, MA, USA.10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6090583 ↗
97. The Armeo Spring as training tool to improve upper limb functionality in multiple sclerosis: A pilot study10.1186/1743-0003-8-5 ↗
98. Feasibility and efficacy of upper limb robotic rehabilitation in a subacute cervical spinal cord injury population10.1038/sc.2011.104 ↗
99. Efficacy of Armeo® robotic therapy versus conventional therapy on upper limb function in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy10.1097/PHM.0000000000000852 ↗
100. Quality-of-life change associated with robotic-assisted therapy to improve hand motor function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized clinical trial10.2522/ptj.20090160 ↗