[Abstract + References] Virtual System Using Haptic Device for Real-Time Tele-Rehabilitation of Upper Limbs

Abstract

This paper proposes a tool to support the rehabilitation of upper limbs assisted remotely, which makes it possible for the physiotherapist to be able to assist and supervise the therapy to patients who can not go to rehabilitation centers. This virtual system for real-time tele-rehabilitation is non-invasive and focuses on involving the patient with mild or moderate mobility alterations within a dynamic therapy based on virtual games; Haptics Devices are used to reeducate and stimulate the movement of the upper extremities, at the same time that both motor skills and Visual-Motor Integration skills are developed. The system contains a virtual interface that emulates real-world environments and activities. The functionality of the Novint Falcon device is exploited to send a feedback response that corrects and stimulates the patient to perform the therapy session correctly. In addition, the therapy session can vary in intensity through the levels presented by the application, and the amount of time, successes and mistakes made by the patient are registered in a database. The first results show the acceptance of the virtual system designed for real-time tele-rehabilitation.

References

1. 1.
   Ingram, T.T.S.: A historical review of the definition of cerebral palsy, the epidemiology of the cerebral palsies. In: Stanley, F.A.E. (ed.) The Epidemiology of the Cerebral Palsies, pp. 1–11. Lippincott, Philadelphia (1984)Google Scholar
2. 2.
   Jones, M.W., Morgan, E., Shelton, J.E., Thorogood, C.: Cerebral palsy: introduction and diagnosis (part I). J. Pediatr. Health Care 21(3), 146–152 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. 3.
   Aicardi, J.: Disease of the Nervous System in Childhood. MacKeith Press, London (1992)Google Scholar
4. 4.
   Feldman, H.M., Chaves-Gnecco, D., Hofkosh, D.: Developmental-behavioral pediatrics. In: Zitelli, B.J., McIntire, S.C., Norwalk, A.J. (eds.) Atlas of Pediatric Diagnosis, Chap. 3, 6th edn. Elsevier Saunders, Philadelphia (2012)Google Scholar
5. 5.
   Ketelaar, M., Vermeer, A., Hart, H., et al.: Effects of a functional therapy program on motor abilities of children with cerebral palsy. Phys. Ther. 81, 1534–1545 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. 6.
   Taub, E., Ramey, S., DeLuca, S., Echols, K.: Efficacy of constraint-induced movement therapy for children with cerebral palsy with asymmetric motor impairment. Pediatrics 113, 305–312 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. 7.
   Sakzewski, L., Ziviani, J., Boyd, R.N.: Efficacy of upper limb therapies for unilateral cerebral palsy: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics 133(1), e175–e204 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. 8.
   Galil, A., Carmel, S., Lubetzky, H., Heiman, N.: Compliance with home rehabilitation therapy by parents of children with disabilities in Jews and Bedouin in Israel. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 43(4), 261–268 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. 9.
   De Campos, A.C., da Costa, C.S., Rocha, N.A.: Measuring changes in functional mobility in children with mild cerebral palsy. Dev. Neurorehabil. 14, 140–144 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. 10.
    Prosser, L.A., Lee, S.C., Barbe, M.F., VanSant, A.F., Lauer, R.T.: Trunk and hip muscle activity in early walkers with and without cerebral palsy – a frequency analysis. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 20, 851–859 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. 11.
    Weiss, P.L.T., Tirosh, E., Fehlings, D.: Role of virtual reality for cerebral palsy management. J. Child Neurol. 29(8), 1119–1124 (2014). 0883073814533007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. 12.
    Mitchell, L., Ziviani, J., Oftedal, S., Boyd, R.: The effect of virtual reality interventions on physical activity in children and adolescents with early brain injuries including cerebral palsy. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 54, 667–671 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. 13.
    Snider, L., Majnemer, A., Darsaklis, V.: Virtual reality as a therapeutic modality for children with cerebral palsy. Dev. Neurorehabil. 13, 120–128 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. 14.
    Chen, Y.P., Lee, S.Y., Howard, A.M.: Effect of virtual reality on upper extremity function in children with cerebral palsy: a meta-analysis. Pediatric Phys. Therapy 26(3), 289–300 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. 15.
    Golomb, M.R., McDonald, B.C., Warden, S.J., Yonkman, J., Saykin, A.J., Shirley, B., et al.: In-home virtual reality videogame telerehabilitation in adolescents with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 91, 1–8 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. 16.
    Shin, J., Song, G., Hwangbo, G.: Effects of conventional neurological treatment and a virtual reality training program on eye-hand coordination in children with cerebral palsy. J. Phys. Therapy Sci. 27(7), 2151–2154 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.27.2151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. 17.
    Chen, Y.P., Kang, L.J., Chuang, T.Y., Doong, J.L., Lee, S.J., Tsai, M.W., Sung, W.H.: Use of virtual reality to improve upper-extremity control in children with cerebral palsy: a single-subject design. Phys. Therapy 87(11), 1441–1457 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. 18.
    Bortone, I., Leonardis, D., Solazzi, M., Procopio, C., Crecchi, A., Bonfiglio, L., Frisoli, A.: Integration of serious games and wearable haptic interfaces for Neuro Rehabilitation of children with movement disorders: a feasibility study. In: 2017 International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), pp. 1094–1099. IEEE, July 2017Google Scholar
19. 19.
    Gupta, A., O’Malley, M.K.: Design of a haptic arm exoskeleton for training and rehabilitation. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 11(3), 280–289 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. 20.
    Kozhaeva, T., Zhestkov, S., Bulakh, D., Houlden, N.: Programmable gesture manipulator for hand injuries rehabilitation. In: Internet Technologies and Applications (ITA), pp. 134–136. IEEE, September 2017Google Scholar
21. 21.
    Pruna, E., et al.: 3D virtual system using a haptic device for fine motor rehabilitation. In: Rocha, Á., Correia, A.M., Adeli, H., Reis, L.P., Costanzo, S. (eds.) WorldCIST 2017. AISC, vol. 570, pp. 648–656. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56538-5_66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. 22.
    Bortone, I., Leonardis, D., Solazzi, M., Procopio, C., Crecchi, A., Briscese, L., Andre, P., Bonfiglio, L., Frisoli, A.: Serious game and wearable haptic devices for neuro motor rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy. In: Converging Clinical and Engineering Research on Neurorehabilitation II, pp. 443–447. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46669-9_74Google Scholar
23. 23.
    Khor, K.X., Chin, P.J.H., Hisyam, A.R., Yeong, C.F., Narayanan, A.L.T., Su, E.L.M.: Development of CR2-Haptic: a compact and portable rehabilitation robot for wrist and forearm training. In: IEEEIECBES International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Sciences, pp. 424–429 (2014)Google Scholar
24. 24.
    Maciejasz, P., Eschweiler, J., Gerlach-Hahn, K., Jansen-Troy, A., Leonhardt, S.: A survey on robotic devices for upper limb rehabilitation. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 11, 3 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. 25.
    Lum, P.S., Burgar, C.G., Shor, P.C., Majmundar, M., Van der Loos, M.: Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 83, 952–959 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

via Virtual System Using Haptic Device for Real-Time Tele-Rehabilitation of Upper Limbs | SpringerLink

[WEB SITE] FDA Approves MindMotion GO, Mobile Neurorehabilitation Product

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted clearance to MindMotion GO, a portable neurorehabilitation product, for launch in the United States.

MindMotion GO utilizes technology that is designed to be used by patients with mild to lightly severe neurological impairments, as well as in the recovery phase of rehabilitation. Produced by the Swiss neurogaming company MindMaze, the mobile rehabilitation product is an outpatient addition to its MindMotion PRO, which received FDA approval in May 2017.

The PRO version differs from the recently approved MindMotion GO in that it is intended for use in patients with severe impairments as well as in early hospital care—in an inpatient setting—with therapeutic activities able to take place within 4 days after a neurological incident.

“Now that both MindMotion products have FDA clearance, MindMaze delivers a full spectrum of neuro-care solutions for both inpatient and outpatient recovery for patients in the United States,” said Tej Tadi, PhD, the CEO and founder of MindMaze, in a statement. “Our unique capability to safely and securely acquire data through our platform is essential for patient recovery and performance, and positions MindMaze as a powerhouse for the future of brain-machine interfaces. Beyond healthcare, this will enable powerful AI-based applications. We are working on a range of brain-tech initiatives at MindMaze to build the infrastructure for innovations to improve patients’ quality of life.”

The mobile MindMotion GO allows for real-time audio and visual feedback, aiding physicians in the assessment of progress and tailoring of therapy to their individual patient’s performance, according to MindMaze. Additionally, it enables the patients to see their progress as well. The set-up and calibration can be done in less than 5 minutes, so patients can begin rehabilitation sessions while physicians facilitate case management.

The program is equipped with a variety of gamified engaging activities which cover motor and task functions and includes a 3D virtual environment. As a result, early findings have suggested that both patient engagement and adherence to therapy have been amplified. Thus far, MindMotion GO has been trialed with upward of 300 patients across therapy centers in the UK, Italy, Germany, and Switzerland.

Neurological impairments are the main cause of long-term disability in the United States, with a recent study estimating direct and indirect costs associated with neurological diseases cost roughly $800 billion annually. For stroke alone, there are almost 800,000 cases each year, with direct annual costs estimated at $22.8 billion.

MindMaze’s Continuum of Care seeks to support earlier, and ongoing, intervention to enable by healthcare providers in the United States to have access to a cost-effective solution for improving neurorehabilitation results.

Even more resources pertaining to stroke prevention and care can be found on MD Magazine‘s new sister site, NeurologyLive.

via FDA Approves MindMotion GO, Mobile Neurorehabilitation Product | MD Magazine

[Abstract + References] Virtual System Using Haptic Device for Real-Time Tele-Rehabilitation of Upper Limbs – Conference paper

Abstract

This paper proposes a tool to support the rehabilitation of upper limbs assisted remotely, which makes it possible for the physiotherapist to be able to assist and supervise the therapy to patients who can not go to rehabilitation centers. This virtual system for real-time tele-rehabilitation is non-invasive and focuses on involving the patient with mild or moderate mobility alterations within a dynamic therapy based on virtual games; Haptics Devices are used to reeducate and stimulate the movement of the upper extremities, at the same time that both motor skills and Visual-Motor Integration skills are developed. The system contains a virtual interface that emulates real-world environments and activities. The functionality of the Novint Falcon device is exploited to send a feedback response that corrects and stimulates the patient to perform the therapy session correctly. In addition, the therapy session can vary in intensity through the levels presented by the application, and the amount of time, successes and mistakes made by the patient are registered in a database. The first results show the acceptance of the virtual system designed for real-time tele-rehabilitation.

References

1. 1.
   Ingram, T.T.S.: A historical review of the definition of cerebral palsy, the epidemiology of the cerebral palsies. In: Stanley, F.A.E. (ed.) The Epidemiology of the Cerebral Palsies, pp. 1–11. Lippincott, Philadelphia (1984)Google Scholar
2. 2.
   Jones, M.W., Morgan, E., Shelton, J.E., Thorogood, C.: Cerebral palsy: introduction and diagnosis (part I). J. Pediatr. Health Care 21(3), 146–152 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. 3.
   Aicardi, J.: Disease of the Nervous System in Childhood. MacKeith Press, London (1992)Google Scholar
4. 4.
   Feldman, H.M., Chaves-Gnecco, D., Hofkosh, D.: Developmental-behavioral pediatrics. In: Zitelli, B.J., McIntire, S.C., Norwalk, A.J. (eds.) Atlas of Pediatric Diagnosis, Chap. 3, 6th edn. Elsevier Saunders, Philadelphia (2012)Google Scholar
5. 5.
   Ketelaar, M., Vermeer, A., Hart, H., et al.: Effects of a functional therapy program on motor abilities of children with cerebral palsy. Phys. Ther. 81, 1534–1545 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. 6.
   Taub, E., Ramey, S., DeLuca, S., Echols, K.: Efficacy of constraint-induced movement therapy for children with cerebral palsy with asymmetric motor impairment. Pediatrics 113, 305–312 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. 7.
   Sakzewski, L., Ziviani, J., Boyd, R.N.: Efficacy of upper limb therapies for unilateral cerebral palsy: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics 133(1), e175–e204 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. 8.
   Galil, A., Carmel, S., Lubetzky, H., Heiman, N.: Compliance with home rehabilitation therapy by parents of children with disabilities in Jews and Bedouin in Israel. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 43(4), 261–268 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. 9.
   De Campos, A.C., da Costa, C.S., Rocha, N.A.: Measuring changes in functional mobility in children with mild cerebral palsy. Dev. Neurorehabil. 14, 140–144 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. 10.
    Prosser, L.A., Lee, S.C., Barbe, M.F., VanSant, A.F., Lauer, R.T.: Trunk and hip muscle activity in early walkers with and without cerebral palsy – a frequency analysis. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 20, 851–859 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. 11.
    Weiss, P.L.T., Tirosh, E., Fehlings, D.: Role of virtual reality for cerebral palsy management. J. Child Neurol. 29(8), 1119–1124 (2014). 0883073814533007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. 12.
    Mitchell, L., Ziviani, J., Oftedal, S., Boyd, R.: The effect of virtual reality interventions on physical activity in children and adolescents with early brain injuries including cerebral palsy. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 54, 667–671 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. 13.
    Snider, L., Majnemer, A., Darsaklis, V.: Virtual reality as a therapeutic modality for children with cerebral palsy. Dev. Neurorehabil. 13, 120–128 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. 14.
    Chen, Y.P., Lee, S.Y., Howard, A.M.: Effect of virtual reality on upper extremity function in children with cerebral palsy: a meta-analysis. Pediatric Phys. Therapy 26(3), 289–300 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. 15.
    Golomb, M.R., McDonald, B.C., Warden, S.J., Yonkman, J., Saykin, A.J., Shirley, B., et al.: In-home virtual reality videogame telerehabilitation in adolescents with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 91, 1–8 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. 16.
    Shin, J., Song, G., Hwangbo, G.: Effects of conventional neurological treatment and a virtual reality training program on eye-hand coordination in children with cerebral palsy. J. Phys. Therapy Sci. 27(7), 2151–2154 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.27.2151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. 17.
    Chen, Y.P., Kang, L.J., Chuang, T.Y., Doong, J.L., Lee, S.J., Tsai, M.W., Sung, W.H.: Use of virtual reality to improve upper-extremity control in children with cerebral palsy: a single-subject design. Phys. Therapy 87(11), 1441–1457 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. 18.
    Bortone, I., Leonardis, D., Solazzi, M., Procopio, C., Crecchi, A., Bonfiglio, L., Frisoli, A.: Integration of serious games and wearable haptic interfaces for Neuro Rehabilitation of children with movement disorders: a feasibility study. In: 2017 International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), pp. 1094–1099. IEEE, July 2017Google Scholar
19. 19.
    Gupta, A., O’Malley, M.K.: Design of a haptic arm exoskeleton for training and rehabilitation. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 11(3), 280–289 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. 20.
    Kozhaeva, T., Zhestkov, S., Bulakh, D., Houlden, N.: Programmable gesture manipulator for hand injuries rehabilitation. In: Internet Technologies and Applications (ITA), pp. 134–136. IEEE, September 2017Google Scholar
21. 21.
    Pruna, E., et al.: 3D virtual system using a haptic device for fine motor rehabilitation. In: Rocha, Á., Correia, A.M., Adeli, H., Reis, L.P., Costanzo, S. (eds.) WorldCIST 2017. AISC, vol. 570, pp. 648–656. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56538-5_66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. 22.
    Bortone, I., Leonardis, D., Solazzi, M., Procopio, C., Crecchi, A., Briscese, L., Andre, P., Bonfiglio, L., Frisoli, A.: Serious game and wearable haptic devices for neuro motor rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy. In: Converging Clinical and Engineering Research on Neurorehabilitation II, pp. 443–447. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46669-9_74Google Scholar
23. 23.
    Khor, K.X., Chin, P.J.H., Hisyam, A.R., Yeong, C.F., Narayanan, A.L.T., Su, E.L.M.: Development of CR2-Haptic: a compact and portable rehabilitation robot for wrist and forearm training. In: IEEEIECBES International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Sciences, pp. 424–429 (2014)Google Scholar
24. 24.
    Maciejasz, P., Eschweiler, J., Gerlach-Hahn, K., Jansen-Troy, A., Leonhardt, S.: A survey on robotic devices for upper limb rehabilitation. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 11, 3 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. 25.
    Lum, P.S., Burgar, C.G., Shor, P.C., Majmundar, M., Van der Loos, M.: Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 83, 952–959 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

via Virtual System Using Haptic Device for Real-Time Tele-Rehabilitation of Upper Limbs | SpringerLink