Posts Tagged arm rehabilitation

[ARTICLE] Dynamic Lycra® orthoses as an adjunct to arm rehabilitation after stroke: a single-blind, two-arm parallel group, randomized controlled feasibility trial – Full Text

The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial of dynamic Lycra® orthoses as an adjunct to arm rehabilitation after stroke and to explore the magnitude and direction of change on arm outcomes.

This is a single-blind, two-arm parallel group, feasibility randomized controlled trial.

In-patient rehabilitation.

The study participants were stroke survivors with arm hemiparesis two to four weeks after stroke receiving in-patient rehabilitation.

Participants were randomized 2:1 to wear Lycra® gauntlets for eight hours daily for eight weeks, plus usual rehabilitation (n = 27), or to usual rehabilitation only (n = 16).

Recruitment, retention, fidelity, adverse events and completeness of data collection were examined at 8 and 16 weeks; arm function (activity limitation; Action Research Arm Test, Motor Activity Log) and impairment (Nine-hole Peg Test, Motricity Index, Modified Tardieu Scale). Structured interviews explored acceptability.

Of the target of 51, 43 (84%) participants were recruited. Retention at 8 weeks was 32 (79%) and 24 (56%) at 16 weeks. In total, 11 (52%) intervention group participants and 6 (50%) control group participants (odds ratio = 1.3, 95% confidence interval = 0.2 to 7.8) had improved Action Research Arm Test level by 8 weeks; at 16 weeks, this was 8 (61%) intervention and 6 (75.0%) control participants (odds ratio = 1.1, 95% confidence interval = 0.1 to 13.1). Change on other measures favoured control participants. Acceptability was influenced by 26 adverse reactions.

Recruitment and retention were low, and adverse reactions were problematic. There were no indications of clinically relevant effects, but the small sample means definitive conclusions cannot be made. A definitive trial is not warranted without orthoses adaptation.

Studies with children who have spastic hemiplegia caused by cerebral palsy suggest that wearing dynamic Lycra® orthoses as an adjunct to goal-directed training may improve movement and functional goal achievement.1 This evidence raises the question of whether the orthoses may be effective as an adjunct to rehabilitation in adults with arm impairments after stroke. Arm impairments, which include weakness and sensory loss, restrict independence in activities of daily living and affect stroke survivors’ quality of life.2

Dynamic Lycra® orthoses are commercially available dynamic braces that use tensile properties of Lycra® to generate torsion, correct muscle force imbalances across joints, optimize muscle length and functional positioning, and provide compression to enhance proprioception and sensory awareness.3,4 However, effectiveness in stroke rehabilitation has not been fully evaluated, despite anecdotal evidence that they are already in use in clinical practice. One single case study of 6 weeks wear in a survivor with long-standing stroke4 and a crossover trial with 16 stroke survivors 3–36 weeks after stroke onset3 involving only 3 hours orthosis wear have shown improvements in arm impairment, sensation and functional outcomes after orthosis wear. Evidence is therefore limited to low-quality study designs, and rigorous effectiveness studies are required.

The aim of this feasibility randomized controlled trial was to examine recruitment, retention, adverse events, intervention fidelity, magnitude and direction of difference in outcomes in stroke survivors receiving Lycra® orthoses as an adjunct to usual rehabilitation, compared to those receiving usual rehabilitation only. It also aimed to explore survivor and carer perceptions of acceptability, to inform decisions about a future definitive randomized controlled trial.[…]


Continue —-> Dynamic Lycra® orthoses as an adjunct to arm rehabilitation after stroke: a single-blind, two-arm parallel group, randomized controlled feasibility trial – Jacqui H Morris, Alexandra John, Lucy Wedderburn, Petra Rauchhaus, Peter T Donnan, 2019


Figure 1. Example of Lycra® gauntlet used in the study.


, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] EMG Feature Extractions for Upper-Limb Functional Movement During Rehabilitation


Rehabilitation is important treatment for post stroke patient to regain their muscle strength and motor coordination as well as to retrain their nervous system. Electromyography (EMG) has been used by researcher to enhance conventional rehabilitation method as a tool to monitor muscle electrical activity however EMG signal is very stochastic in nature and contains some noise. Special technique is yet to be researched in processing EMG signal to make it useful and effective both to researcher and to patient in general. Feature extraction is among the signal processing technique involved and the best method for specific EMG study needs to be applied. In this works, nine feature extractions techniques are applied to EMG signals recorder from subjects performing upper limb rehabilitation activity based on suggested movement sequence pattern. Three healthy subjects perform the experiment with three trials each and EMG data were recorded from their bicep and deltoid muscle. The applied features for every trials of each subject were analyzed statistically using student T-Test their significant of p-value. The results were then totaled up and compared between the nine features applied and Auto Regressive coefficient (AR) present the best result and consistent with each subjects’ data. This feature will be used later in our future research work of Upper-limb Virtual Reality Rehabilitation.

via EMG Feature Extractions for Upper-Limb Functional Movement During Rehabilitation – IEEE Conference Publication

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] A multisession evaluation of an adaptive competitive arm rehabilitation game – Full Text


People with neurological injuries such as stroke should exercise frequently and intensely to regain their motor abilities, but are generally hindered by lack of motivation. One way to increase motivation in rehabilitation is through competitive exercises, but such exercises have only been tested in single brief sessions and usually did not adapt difficulty to the patient’s abilities.


We designed a competitive arm rehabilitation game for two players that dynamically adapts its difficulty to both players’ abilities. This game was evaluated by two participant groups: 15 participants with chronic arm impairment who exercised at home with an unimpaired friend or relative, and 20 participants in the acute or subacute phase of stroke who exercised in pairs (10 pairs) at a rehabilitation clinic. All participants first played the game against their human opponent for 3 sessions, then played alone (against a computer opponent) in the final, fourth session. In all sessions, participants’ subjective experiences were assessed with the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory questionnaire while exercise intensity was measured using inertial sensors built into the rehabilitation device. After the fourth session, a final brief questionnaire was used to compare competition and exercising alone.


Participants who played against an unimpaired friend or relative at home tended to prefer competition (only 1 preferred exercising alone), and exhibited higher enjoyment and exercise intensity when competing (first three sessions) than when exercising alone (last session).

Participants who played against each other in the clinic, however, did not exhibit significant differences between competition and exercising alone. For both groups, there was no difference in enjoyment or exercise intensity between the first three sessions, indicating no negative effects of habituation or novelty.


Competitive exercises have high potential for unsupervised home rehabilitation, as they improve enjoyment and exercise intensity compared to exercising alone. Such exercises could thus improve rehabilitation outcome, but this needs to be tested in long-term clinical trials. It is not clear why participants who competed against each other at the clinic did not exhibit any advantages of competition, and further studies are needed to determine how different factors (environment, nature of opponent etc.) influence patients’ experiences with competitive exercises.

Trial registration

The study is not a clinical trial. While human subjects are involved, they do not participate in a full rehabilitation intervention, and no health outcomes are examined.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12984-017-0336-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.


Rehabilitation games

Stroke is a leading cause of disability, with 795,000 new or recurrent strokes per year in the United States alone [1]. 88% of survivors experience motor function impairment and thus require rehabilitation to regain their movement abilities [2]. However, even top hospitals devote only an hour per day to motor rehabilitation [3], and exercise intensity is usually too low for optimal rehabilitation outcome [4]. Patients are thus expected to exercise independently at home after leaving the clinic to fully regain their abilities, but frequently do not exercise frequently or intensely enough. For example, one study found that only 30% of unsupervised patients comply with prescribed home rehabilitation regimens [5]. Another home rehabilitation study found that patients average around 1.5 h of exercise per week [6], while clinical studies involve at least 3 h of exercise per week [78]. To improve home rehabilitation, it is therefore critical to increase the frequency and intensity of exercise.

One key reason for poor compliance in home rehabilitation is lack of motivation, which is an important predictor of rehabilitation outcome [910]. While the definition of motivation in rehabilitation is blurry, it is generally agreed to involve a willingness to actively engage in exercise [1112]. To improve engagement, researchers have thus developed numerous rehabilitation games that try to both ensure high enjoyment (using, e.g., meaningful goals, in-game rewards and entertaining graphics [1215]) and provide an appropriate exercise intensity via automated difficulty adaptation [121416]. The games are controlled using motion tracking hardware such as the Microsoft Kinect or even with rehabilitation robots that provide limb support in addition to motion tracking. However, recent reviews have emphasized that such games are not yet sufficiently engaging for all patients [1718]. Therefore, additional rehabilitation game development and validation is necessary to improve patient engagement.[…]


Continue —> A multisession evaluation of an adaptive competitive arm rehabilitation game

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.Object name is 12984_2017_336_Fig1_HTML.jpg

Fig. 1
The Bimeo arm rehabilitation system in the wrist and forearm training configuration. Inertial sensors are attached to the upper arm, attached to the forearm, and integrated in the sphere that supports the hand

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract+References] A Low-Cost and Lightweight Alternative to Rehabilitation Robots: Omnidirectional Interactive Mobile Robot for Arm Rehabilitation 


Robotic rehabilitation is a growing field. Robots facilitate repetitive therapies, which have positive effects on the rehabilitation of patients who lack arm control because of central nervous system lesions. However, the use of such rehabilitation robots is rare due to high costs and low acceptance among patients. Therefore, this study is focused on the development and control of a novel low-cost omnidirectional interactive mobile robotic platform with force feedback to assist and guide a patient’s hand during therapy. The primary goals for such a mobile robot are to minimize its weight and dimensions, which are significant factors in patient acceptance. Position-based stiffness control was employed with a proportional derivative controller to control the position of the robot and to assist the patient during motion. A user interface with given tasks was built to manage tasks, obtain test results and set control variables. Test results showed that the developed experimental mobile robot successfully assisted and guided the user during the test period.


  1. 1.
    Riener, R.; Nef, T.; Colombo, G.: Robot-aided neurorehabilitation of the upper extremities. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 43(1), 2–10 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sunderland, A.; Tinson, D.J.; Bradley, E.L.; Fletcher, D.; Hewer, R.L.; Wade, D.T.: Enhanced physical therapy improves recovery of arm function after stroke. A randomised controlled trial. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 55(7), 530–535 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kwakkel, G.; Kollen, B.J.; Wagenaar, R.C.: Long term effects of intensity of upper and lower limb training after stroke: a randomised trial. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 72(4), 473–479 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reinkensmeyer, D.J.; Dewald, J.; Rymer, W.Z.: Guidance-based quantification of arm impairment following brain injury: a pilot study. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 7(1), 1–11 (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reinkensmeyer, D.J.; Schmit, B.D.; Rymer, W.Z.: Mechatronic assessment of arm impairment after chronic brain injury. Technol. Health Care 7(6), 431–435 (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lum, P.S.; Reinkensmeyer, D.J.; Lehman, S.L.: Robotic assist devices for bimanual physical therapy: preliminary experiments. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 1(3), 185–191 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lum, P.S.; Lehman, S.L.; Reinkensmeyer, D.J.: The bimanual lifting rehabilitator: an adaptive machine for therapy of stroke patients. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 3(2), 166–174 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hesse, S.; Schulte-Tigges, G.; Konrad, M.; Bardeleben, A.; Werner, C.: Robot-assisted arm trainer for the passive and active practice of bilateral forearm and wrist movements in hemiparetic subjects. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 84(6), 915–920 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cozens, J.A.: Robotic assistance of an active upper limb exercise in neurologically impaired patients. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 7(2), 254–256 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hogan, N.; Krebs, H.I.; Charnnarong, J.; Srikrishna, P.; Sharon, A.: MIT-MANUS: a workstation for manual therapy and training. I. In: Robot and Human Communication Proceedings, pp. 161–165 (1992)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hogan, N.; Krebs, H.I.; Charnnarong, J.; Srikrishna, P.; Sharon, A.: MIT-MANUS: a workstation for manual therapy and training II. In: Applications in Optical Science and Engineering, pp. 28–34 (1993)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van der Linde R.Q.; Lammertse, P.; Frederiksen, E.; Ruiter, B.: The HapticMaster a new high-performance haptic interface. In: Proceedings of Eurohaptics, pp. 1–5 (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nef, T.; Riener, R.: ARMin-design of a novel arm rehabilitation robot. In: Rehabilitation Robotics, pp. 57–60 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Werry I.; Dautenhahn K.: Applying mobile robot technology to the rehabilitation of autistic children. In: Proceedings of SIRS99-7th Symposium on Intelligent Robotic Systems (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eriksson, J.; Mataric, M.J.; Winstein, C.: Hands-off assistive robotics for post-stroke arm rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, pp. 21–24 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tapus, A.; Tăpus, C.; Matarić, M.J.: User–robot personality matching and assistive robot behavior adaptation for post-stroke rehabilitation therapy. Intell. Serv. Robot. 1(2), 169–183 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pin, F.G.; Killough, S.M.: A new family of omnidirectional and holonomic wheeled platforms for mobile robots. IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 10(4), 480–489 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Huang, L.; Lim, Y.S.; Lee, D.; Teoh, C.E.: Design and analysis of a four-wheel omnidirectional mobile robot. In: 2nd International Conference of Autonomous Robots and Agents, pp. 425–428 (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zeng, G.; Hemami, A.: An overview of robot force control. Robotica 15(05), 473–482 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Evans, F.; Evans, F.G.; Abdelnour, T.: Anatomical data for analyzing human motion. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 54(2), 169–178 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    D’Ausilio, A.: Arduino: a low-cost multipurpose lab equipment. Behav. Res. Methods 44(2), 305–313 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Teikari, P.; Najjar, R.P.; Malkki, H.; Knoblauch, K.; Dumortier, D.; Gronfier, C.; Cooper, H.M.: An inexpensive Arduino-based LED stimulator system for vision research. J. Neurosci. Methods 211(2), 227–236 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.

Source: A Low-Cost and Lightweight Alternative to Rehabilitation Robots: Omnidirectional Interactive Mobile Robot for Arm Rehabilitation | SpringerLink

, , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] An extended kinematic model for arm rehabilitation training and assessment


In the rehabilitation training and assessment of upper limbs, the conventional kinematic model treats the arm as a serial manipulator and maps the rotations in the joint space to movements in the Cartesian space. While this model brings simplicity and convenience, and thus has been overwhelming used, its accuracy is limited, especially for the distal parts of the upper limb that execute dexterous movements.

In this paper, a novel kinematic model of the arm has been proposed, which has been inspired by the biomechanical analysis of the forearm and wrist anatomy. One additional parameter is introduced into the conventional arm model, and then both the forward and inverse kinematic models of five parameters are derived for the motion of upper arm medial/lateral rotation, elbow flexion/extension, forearm pronation/supination, wrist flexion/extension and ulnar/radial deviation. Then, experiments with an advanced haptic interface have been designed and performed to examine the presented arm kinematic model. Data analysis revealed that accuracy and robustness can be significantly improved with the new model.

This extended arm kinematic model will help device development, movement training and assessment of upper limb rehabilitation.

Published in: Advanced Robotics and Mechatronics (ICARM), International Conference on

Source: An extended kinematic model for arm rehabilitation training and assessment – IEEE Xplore Document

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Webinar] “How advanced technology can help you overcome challenges in arm rehabilitation” – Hocoma Academy

“How advanced technology can help you overcome challenges in arm rehabilitation”

Recorded webinar, 1st of June 2016

Source: Webinar

, ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: