University of Hertfordshire

From the same journal

From the same journal

By the same authors

Standard

Training modalities in robot-mediated upper limb rehabilitation in stroke : A framework for classification based on a systematic review. / Basteris, Angelo; Nijenhuis, Sharon M.; Stienen, Arno H. A.; Buurke, Jaap H.; Prange, Gerdienke B.; Amirabdollahian, Farshid.

In: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, Vol. 11, No. 1, 111, 10.07.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{8a689950b4a345b8a8db553c417bdc4e,
title = "Training modalities in robot-mediated upper limb rehabilitation in stroke: A framework for classification based on a systematic review",
abstract = "Robot-mediated post-stroke therapy for the upper-extremity dates back to the 1990s. Since then, a number of robotic devices have become commercially available. There is clear evidence that robotic interventions improve upper limb motor scores and strength, but these improvements are often not transferred to performance of activities of daily living. We wish to better understand why. Our systematic review of 74 papers focuses on the targeted stage of recovery, the part of the limb trained, the different modalities used, and the effectiveness of each. The review shows that most of the studies so far focus on training of the proximal arm for chronic stroke patients. About the training modalities, studies typically refer to active, active-assisted and passive interaction. Robot-therapy in active assisted mode was associated with consistent improvements in arm function. More specifically, the use of HRI features stressing active contribution by the patient, such as EMG-modulated forces or a pushing force in combination with spring-damper guidance, may be beneficial.Our work also highlights that current literature frequently lacks information regarding the mechanism about the physical human-robot interaction (HRI). It is often unclear how the different modalities are implemented by different research groups (using different robots and platforms). In order to have a better and more reliable evidence of usefulness for these technologies, it is recommended that the HRI is better described and documented so that work of various teams can be considered in the same group and categories, allowing to infer for more suitable approaches. We propose a framework for categorisation of HRI modalities and features that will allow comparing their therapeutic benefits.",
keywords = "Arm, Hand, Neurorehabilitation, Robotics, Stroke, Therapeutic interaction, Upper extremity, Wrist",
author = "Angelo Basteris and Nijenhuis, {Sharon M.} and Stienen, {Arno H. A.} and Buurke, {Jaap H.} and Prange, {Gerdienke B.} and Farshid Amirabdollahian",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2014 Basteris et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The work described in this manuscript was partially funded by the European project {\textquoteleft}SCRIPT{\textquoteright} Grant agreement no: 288698 (http://scriptproject.eu). SN has been hosted at University of Hertfordshire in a short-term scientific mission funded by the COST Action TD1006 European Network on Robotics for NeuroRehabilitation",
year = "2014",
month = jul,
day = "10",
doi = "10.1186/1743-0003-11-111",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
journal = "Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation",
issn = "1743-0003",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Training modalities in robot-mediated upper limb rehabilitation in stroke

T2 - A framework for classification based on a systematic review

AU - Basteris, Angelo

AU - Nijenhuis, Sharon M.

AU - Stienen, Arno H. A.

AU - Buurke, Jaap H.

AU - Prange, Gerdienke B.

AU - Amirabdollahian, Farshid

N1 - © 2014 Basteris et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The work described in this manuscript was partially funded by the European project ‘SCRIPT’ Grant agreement no: 288698 (http://scriptproject.eu). SN has been hosted at University of Hertfordshire in a short-term scientific mission funded by the COST Action TD1006 European Network on Robotics for NeuroRehabilitation

PY - 2014/7/10

Y1 - 2014/7/10

N2 - Robot-mediated post-stroke therapy for the upper-extremity dates back to the 1990s. Since then, a number of robotic devices have become commercially available. There is clear evidence that robotic interventions improve upper limb motor scores and strength, but these improvements are often not transferred to performance of activities of daily living. We wish to better understand why. Our systematic review of 74 papers focuses on the targeted stage of recovery, the part of the limb trained, the different modalities used, and the effectiveness of each. The review shows that most of the studies so far focus on training of the proximal arm for chronic stroke patients. About the training modalities, studies typically refer to active, active-assisted and passive interaction. Robot-therapy in active assisted mode was associated with consistent improvements in arm function. More specifically, the use of HRI features stressing active contribution by the patient, such as EMG-modulated forces or a pushing force in combination with spring-damper guidance, may be beneficial.Our work also highlights that current literature frequently lacks information regarding the mechanism about the physical human-robot interaction (HRI). It is often unclear how the different modalities are implemented by different research groups (using different robots and platforms). In order to have a better and more reliable evidence of usefulness for these technologies, it is recommended that the HRI is better described and documented so that work of various teams can be considered in the same group and categories, allowing to infer for more suitable approaches. We propose a framework for categorisation of HRI modalities and features that will allow comparing their therapeutic benefits.

AB - Robot-mediated post-stroke therapy for the upper-extremity dates back to the 1990s. Since then, a number of robotic devices have become commercially available. There is clear evidence that robotic interventions improve upper limb motor scores and strength, but these improvements are often not transferred to performance of activities of daily living. We wish to better understand why. Our systematic review of 74 papers focuses on the targeted stage of recovery, the part of the limb trained, the different modalities used, and the effectiveness of each. The review shows that most of the studies so far focus on training of the proximal arm for chronic stroke patients. About the training modalities, studies typically refer to active, active-assisted and passive interaction. Robot-therapy in active assisted mode was associated with consistent improvements in arm function. More specifically, the use of HRI features stressing active contribution by the patient, such as EMG-modulated forces or a pushing force in combination with spring-damper guidance, may be beneficial.Our work also highlights that current literature frequently lacks information regarding the mechanism about the physical human-robot interaction (HRI). It is often unclear how the different modalities are implemented by different research groups (using different robots and platforms). In order to have a better and more reliable evidence of usefulness for these technologies, it is recommended that the HRI is better described and documented so that work of various teams can be considered in the same group and categories, allowing to infer for more suitable approaches. We propose a framework for categorisation of HRI modalities and features that will allow comparing their therapeutic benefits.

KW - Arm

KW - Hand

KW - Neurorehabilitation

KW - Robotics

KW - Stroke

KW - Therapeutic interaction

KW - Upper extremity

KW - Wrist

U2 - 10.1186/1743-0003-11-111

DO - 10.1186/1743-0003-11-111

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84903867077

VL - 11

JO - Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

JF - Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

SN - 1743-0003

IS - 1

M1 - 111

ER -