Posts Tagged Fingers Extending eXoskeleton

[Conference paper] FEX a Fingers Extending eXoskeleton for Rehabilitation and Regaining Mobility – Abstract+References

 

Abstract

This paper presents the design process of an exoskeleton for executing human fingers’ extension movement for the rehabilitation procedures and as an active orthosis purposes. The Fingers Extending eXoskeleton (FEX) is a serial, under-actuated mechanism capable of executing fingers’ extension. The proposed solution is easily adaptable to any finger length or position of the joints. FEX is based on the state-of-art FingerSpine serial system. Straightening force is transmitted from a DC motor to the exoskeleton structures with use of pulled tendons. In trial tests the device showed good usability and functionality. The final prototype is a result of almost half a year of the development process described in this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Sale P, Lombardi V, Franceschini M (2012) Hand robotics rehabilitation: feasibility and preliminary results of a robotic treatment in patients with hemiparesis. Stroke Res Treat 2012:820931 Epub 26 December 2012Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Franceschini M et al (2012) Clinical relevance of action observation in upper-limb stroke rehabilitation: a possible role in recovery of functional dexterity: a randomized clinical trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 26(5):456–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berger RA, Weiss A-PC (2003) Hand surgery. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buryanov A, Kotiuk V (2010) Proportions of hand segments. Int J Morphol 28(3):755–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Christopher JH (1995) Force-reflecting anthropomorphic hand masters. Armstrong laboratory internal report, crew systems directorate biodynamics and biocommunications division human systems center, Air force materiel command, July 1995Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garrett JW (1970) Anthropometry of the hands of female air force flight personnel. Technical report AMRL-TR-69-26, USAF aerospace medical research laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB OHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Sale P, Bovolenta F, Agosti M, Clerici P, Franceschini M (2014) Short-term and long-term outcomes of serial robotic training for improving upper limb function in chronic stroke. Int J Rehabil Res 37(1):67–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    An KN, Askew LJ, Chao EY (1986) Biomechanics and functional assessment of upper extremities, trends in ergonomics/human factors III. In: Karwowski W (ed) Elsevier Science Publishers BV, North-Holland, pp 573–580Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Darling WG, Cole KJ (1990) Muscle activation patterns and kinetics of human index finger movements. J Neurophysiol 63(5):1098–1108Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yamaura H, Matsushita K, Kato R, Yokoi H (2009) Development of hand rehabilitation system for paralysis patient – universal design using wire-driven mechanism. In: 31st annual international conference of the IEEE EMBS, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2–6 September 2009Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fontana M, Bergamasco M, Salsedo F (2009) Mechanical design and experimental characterization of a novel hand exoskeleton. In: Proceedings of the AIMETA 2009, Ancona, Italy, 14–17 September 2009Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wege A, Hommel G (2005) Development and control of a hand exoskeleton for rehabilitation of hand injuries. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, Berlin, Germany, pp 3461–3466Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mulas M, Folgheraiter M, Gini G: An EMG-controlled exoskeleton for hand rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 9th international conference on rehabilitation robotics, Chicago, 28 June–1 July 2005, pp 371–374Google Scholar
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Kawasaki H, Ito S, Ishigure Y, Nishimoto Y, Aoki T, Mouri T, Sakaeda H, Abe M (2007) Development of a hand motion assist robot for rehabilitation therapy by patient self-motion control. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 10th international conference on rehabilitation robotics, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 12–15 June 2007, pp 234–240Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hirose S (1985) Connected differential mechanism and its applications. In: Proceedings of 1985 international conference on advanced robotics, Tokyo, Japan, September, pp 319–325Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hirose S (1993) Biologically inspired robotics. Oxford University Press, Oxford Translated by Cave P, Goulden CGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Montambault S, Gosselin CM (2001) Analysis of under actuated mechanical grippers. ASME J Mech Des 123(3):367–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ryan RM (1982) Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: an extension of cognitive evaluation theory. J Pers Soc Psychol 43(3):450–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McAuley E, Duncan T, Tammen V (1989) Psychometric properties of the intrinsic motivation inventory in a competitive sport setting: a confirmatory factor analysis. Res Q Exerc Sport 60(1):48–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brooke J (1996) SUS: a quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Weerdmeester B, Thomas A, Mclelland IL (eds) Usability evaluation in industry. Taylor & Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bangor A, Kortum P, Miller J (2009) Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. J Usability Stud 4(3):114–123Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bangor A, Kortum P, Miller J (2008) An empirical evaluation of the system usability scale. Int J Hum Comput Interact 24(6):574–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Source: FEX a Fingers Extending eXoskeleton for Rehabilitation and Regaining Mobility | SpringerLink

, , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: