Design Methodology for Rehabilitation Robots: Application in an Exoskeleton for Upper Limb Rehabilitation
Source abstract
Abstract
This article presents a methodology for the design of rehabilitation devices that considers factors involved in a clinical environment. This methodology integrates different disciplines that work together. The methodology is composed by three phases and 13 stages with specific tasks, the first phase includes the clinical context considering the requirements of the patient and therapist during the rehabilitation, the second phase is focused in engineering based on the philosophy of digital twin, and in the third phase is evaluated the device. This article explains the characteristics of the methodology and how it was applied in the design of an exoskeleton for passive rehabilitation of upper limb.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery · Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics · Muscle activation and electromyography studies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Engineering, Autonomous University of Mexico State, Cerro de Coatepec, 50130 Toluca, Mexico
Faculty of Medicine, Autonomous University of Mexico State, Tollocan Avenue, 50120 Toluca, Mexico
Cátedras CONACYT, Autonomous University of Mexico State, 50130 Toluca, Mexico
References (26)
Show source-provided references
1. Aplicación de tecnologías de rehabilitación robótica en niños con lesión del miembro superior
2. Enderle, J., Bronzino, J., and Blanchard, S. (2005). Introduction to Biomedical Engineering, Academic Press.
3. Nematollahi, M., Baghbaderani, K.S., Amerinatanzi, A., Zamanian, H., and Elahinia, M. (2019). Application of NiTi in Assistive and Rehabilitation Devices: A Review. Bioengineering.10.3390/bioengineering6020037 ↗
4. Aprile, I., Germanotta, M., Cruciani, A., Loreti, S., Pecchioli, C., Cecchi, F., Montesano, A., Galeri, S., Diverio, M., and Falsini, C. (2020). Upper Limb Robotic Rehabilitation After Stroke: A Multicenter, Randomized Clinical Trial. J. Neurol. Phys. Ther. JNPT.10.1097/NPT.0000000000000295 ↗
5. Kwakkel, G., Kollen, B.J., and Krebs, H.I. (2008). Effects of robot-assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: A systematic review. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair.10.1177/1545968307305457 ↗
6. Amin, H., and Assal, S.F. (2018, January 5–8). Design Methodology of a Spring Roll Dielectric Elastomer-Based Actuator for a Hand Rehabilitation System. Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA), Changchun, China.10.1109/ICMA.2018.8484462 ↗
7. Heidari, O., Wolbrecht, E.T., Perez-Gracia, A., and Yihun, Y.S. (2018). A task-based design methodology for robotic exoskeletons. J. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. Eng., 5.10.1177/2055668318800672 ↗
8. Dahmen, C., and Constantinescu, C. (2020). Methodology of Employing Exoskeleton Technology in Manufacturing by Considering Time-Related and Ergonomics Influences. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10051591 ↗
9. Durfee, W., and Iaizzo, P. (2016). Medical Device Innovation Handbook, Lulu.com.
10. Medical Devices: Definition, Classification, and Regulatory Implications10.1007/s40264-019-00878-3 ↗
11. Oña, E.D., Garcia-Haro, J.M., Jardón, A., and Balaguer, C. (2019). Robotics in Health Care: Perspectives of Robot-Aided Interventions in Clinical Practice for Rehabilitation of Upper Limbs. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app9132586 ↗
12. ISO (2019). Medical Electrical Equipment—Part 2-78: Particular Requirements for Basic Safety and Essential Performance of Medical Robots for Rehabilitation, Assessment, Compensation or Alleviation.
13. ISO (2016). ISO 13485 Management Systems of the Quality of Medical Equipment.
14. Boschert, S., Heinrich, C., and Rosen, R. (2018, January 7–11). Next Generation Digital Twin. Proceedings of the TMCE 2018, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
15. A feature-based framework for structuring industrial digital twins10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2950507 ↗
16. Zuñiga Aviles, L.A., Szkodny, T., Pedraza Ortega, J.C., and Gorrostieta Hurtado, E. (2010). Systematic Analysis of an IEED Unit Based in a New Methodology for M and S. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst.10.5772/10491 ↗
17. Kommu, S.S. (2007). Designing Safety-Critical Rehabilitation Robots. Rehabilitation Robotics, IntechOpen. Chapter 4.
18. Cruz Martínez, G.M., Vilchis Gonzalez, A.H., Aviles Zuñiga, L.A., Avila Vilchis, J.C., and Hernandez Sanchez, A. (2018). Diseño de Exoesqueleto con base en Cuatro Casos de Estudio de Rehabilitación de Miembro Superior. Rev. Mex. Ing. Biomédica, 39.
19. Gopura, R., Kiguchi, K., and Li, Y. (2009, January 10–15). SUEFUL-7 A 7-DOF Upper-Limb Exoskeleton Robot with Muscle Model Oriented EMG Based Control. Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, St. Louis, MO, USA.10.1109/IROS.2009.5353935 ↗
20. Kiguchi, K., Kose, Y., and Hayashi, Y. (2010, January 26–29). An upper-limb power-assist exoskeleton robot with task-oriented perception-assist. Proceedings of the 2010 3rd IEEE RAS & EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, Tokyo, Japan.10.1109/BIOROB.2010.5626025 ↗
21. Agrawal, S., Dubey, V., Gangloff, J., Brackbill, E., Mao, Y., and Sangwan, V. (2009). Design and Optimization of a Cable Driven Upper Arm Exoskeleton. J. Med. Devices.10.1115/1.3191724 ↗
22. Dubey, V., and Agrawal, S. (2010). Gravity Balancing Conditions for an Upper Arm Exoskeleton. J. Med. Devices.10.1115/1.3442754 ↗
23. Hocoma (2019, October 29). Armeo HOCOMA. Available online: https://www.hocoma.com/us/solutions/armeo-power.
24. De Salud, S. (2012). NOM-241-SSA1-2012 Good Manufacturing Practices for Establishments, Norma Oficial Mexicana.
25. Clarkson, H., and Gilewich, G.B. (2005). Musculoskeletal Assessment: Joint Range of Motion and Manual Muscle Strength, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
26. Rubin, J., and Chisnell, D. (2009). Handbook of Usability Testing, Wiley.