Posts Tagged games

[Abstract+References] A Serious Games Platform for Cognitive Rehabilitation with Preliminary Evaluation

Abstract

In recent years Serious Games have evolved substantially, solving problems in diverse areas. In particular, in Cognitive Rehabilitation, Serious Games assume a relevant role. Traditional cognitive therapies are often considered repetitive and discouraging for patients and Serious Games can be used to create more dynamic rehabilitation processes, holding patients’ attention throughout the process and motivating them during their road to recovery. This paper reviews Serious Games and user interfaces in rehabilitation area and details a Serious Games platform for Cognitive Rehabilitation that includes a set of features such as: natural and multimodal user interfaces and social features (competition, collaboration, and handicapping) which can contribute to augment the motivation of patients during the rehabilitation process. The web platform was tested with healthy subjects. Results of this preliminary evaluation show the motivation and the interest of the participants by playing the games.

References

  1. 1.
    Burke, J. W., McNeill, M. D. J., Charles, D. K., Morrow, P. J., Crosbie, J. H., and McDonough, S. M., Optimising engagement for stroke rehabilitation using serious games. Vis. Comput. 25:1085–1099, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burke, J. W., McNeill, M. D. J., Charles, D. K., Morrow, P. J., Crosbie, J. H., McDonough, S. M. Augmented reality games for upper-limb stroke rehabilitation. In: 2010 second international conference on games and virtual worlds for serious applications (VS-GAMES). pp. 75–78. 2010.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maclean, N., Pound, P., Wolfe, C., and Rudd, A., Qualitative analysis of stroke patients’ motivation for rehabilitation. Br. Med. J. 321:1051–1054, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Krichevets, A. N., Sirotkina, E. B., Yevsevicheva, I. V., and Zeldin, L. M., Computer games as a means of movement rehabilitation. Disabil. Rehabil. 17:100–105, 1995.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rego, P., Moreira, P. M., Reis, L. P., Serious games for rehabilitation: a survey and a classification towards a taxonomy. In: 5th Iberian conference on information systems and technologies. Vol. I. pp. 349–354. Santiago de Compostela, Spain, 2010.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rego, P. A., Moreira, P. M., Reis, L. P., New forms of interaction in serious games for rehabilitation. In: Cruz-Cunha, M. M., (Ed.), Handbook of research on serious games as educational, business, and research tools: development and design. IGI Global, 2012.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rego, P. A., Moreira, P. M., and Reis, L. P., A serious games framework for health rehabilitation. Int. J. Healthc. Inf. Syst. Inf. (IJHISI) 9:1–21, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rego, P. A., Moreira, P. M., Reis, L. P., Architecture for serious games in health rehabilitation. In: Rocha, Á., Correia, A. M., Tan, F. B., Stroetmann, K. A.. (Eds.), New perspectives in information systems and technologies, volume 2, Vol. 276. pp. 307–317. Springer International Publishing, 2014.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mendes, L., Dores, A. R., Rego, P. A., Moreira, P. M., Barbosa, F., Reis, L. P., Viana, J., Coelho, A., and Sousa, A., Virtual centre for the rehabilitation of road accident victims (VICERAVI). In: Rocha, A., CalvoManzano, J., Reis, L. P., and Cota, M. P. (Eds.), 7th Iberian conference on information systems and technologies (CISTI 2012), vol. I. AISTI, Madrid, pp. 817–822, 2012.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rocha, R., Reis, L. P., Rego, P. A., Moreira, P. M., Serious games for cognitive rehabilitation: Forms of interaction and social dimension. In: 2015 10th Iberian conference on information systems and technologies (CISTI). pp. 1–6. 2015.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alankus, G., Lazar, A., May, M., Kelleher, C., Towards customizable games for stroke rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. pp. 2113–2122. ACM, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 2010.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ma, M., and Bechkoum, K., Serious games for movement therapy after stroke. IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. International Convention & Exhibition Center, Suntec Singapore, pp. 1872–1877, 2008.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karray, F., Alemzadeh, M., Saleh, J. A., and Arab, M. N., Human-computer interaction: overview on state of the art. Int. J. Smart Sens. Intell. Syst. 1:137–159, 2008.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oviatt, S., Multimodal interfaces. In: Julie, A. J., Andrew, S., (Eds.), The human-computer interaction handbook, pp. 286–304. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc, 2003.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rego, P. A., Moreira, P. M., Reis, L. P., Natural user interfaces in serious games for rehabilitation: a prototype and playability study. In: Rocha, Á., Gonçalves, R., Cota, M. P., Reis, L. P., (Eds.), First Iberian Workshop on Serious Games and Meaningful Play (SGaMePlay’2011) – Proceedings of the 6th iberian conference on information systems and technologies, Vol. I. pp. 229–232. Chaves, Portugal, 2011.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rego, P. A., Moreira, P. M., Reis, L. P., Natural and multimodal user interfaces in serious games for health rehabilitation. In: MASH’14: Multi-agent systems for healthcare / AAMAS’14 – 13th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems. IFAMAAS, 2014.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jaimes, A., and Sebe, N., Multimodal human-computer interaction: a survey. Comput. Vis. Image Underst. 108:116–134, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jain, J., Lund, A., Wixon, D., The future of natural user interfaces. In: CHI ‘11 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. pp. 211–214. ACM, 1979527, 2011.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chai, J. Y., Hong, P., Zhou, M. X., A probabilistic approach to reference resolution in multimodal user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on intelligent user interfaces. pp. 70–77. ACM, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal, 2004.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Faria, B. M., Reis, L. P., Lau, N., Soares, J. C., and Vasconcelos, S., Patient classification and automatic configuration of an intelligent wheelchair. In: Filipe, J., and Fred, A. (Eds.), Agents and artificial intelligence, vol. 358. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 268–282, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Johnston, M., Bangalore, S., MATCHkiosk: a multimodal interactive city guide. In: Proceedings of the ACL 2004 on Interactive poster and demonstration sessions. pp. 33. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2004.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ibrahim, A., and Johansson, P., Multimodal dialogue systems: a case study for interactive TV. In: Carbonell, N., and Stephanidis, C. (Eds.), Universal access theoretical perspectives, practice, and experience: 7th ERCIM international workshop on user interfaces for all, Paris, France, October 24–25, 2002, revised papers. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, pp. 209–218, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morikawa, C., and Lyons, M. J., Design and evaluation of vision-based head and face tracking interfaces for assistive input. In: Georgios, K. (Ed.), Assistive technologies and computer access for motor disabilities. IGI Global, Hershey, pp. 180–205, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ronzhin, A., Karpov, A., Assistive multimodal system based on speech recognition and head tracking. In: Proceedings of 13th European Signal Processing Conference. 2005Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reis, L., Faria, B., Vasconcelos, S., Lau, N., Invited paper: multimodal interface for an intelligent wheelchair. In: Ferrier, J.-L., Gusikhin, O., Madani, K., Sasiadek, J., (Eds.), Informatics in control, automation and robotics, Vol. 325. pp. 1–34. Springer International Publishing, 2015Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ogiela, M. R., and Hachaj, T., Natural user interfaces in medical image analysis: cognitive analysis of brain and carotid artery images. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, 2014.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Steinberg, G., Natural user interfaces. In: ACM SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 2012.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Faria, B. M., Reis, L. P., Lau, N., Moreira, A. P., Petry, M., Ferreira, L. M., Intelligent wheelchair driving: bridging the gap between virtual and real intelligent wheelchairs. In: Pereira, F., Machado, P., Costa, E., Cardoso, A., (Eds.), Progress in artificial intelligence. Vol. 9273, pp. 445–456. Springer International Publishing, 2015.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Faria, B. M., Reis, L. P., Lau, N., A methodology for creating an adapted command language for driving an intelligent wheelchair. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 80, 2015.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Faria, B., Reis, L., and Lau, N., Adapted control methods for cerebral palsy users of an intelligent wheelchair. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 77:299–312, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Faria, B. M., Silva, A., Faias, J., Reis, L. P., Lau, N., Intelligent wheelchair driving: a comparative study of cerebral palsy adults with distinct boccia experience. In: Rocha, Á., Correia, A. M., Tan, F. B., Stroetmann, K. A., (Eds.), New perspectives in information systems and technologies, volume 2. Vol. 276. pp. 329–340. Springer International Publishing, 2014.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Faria, B. M., Vasconcelos, S., and Reis, L. P., Evaluation of distinct input methods of an intelligent wheelchair in simulated and real environments: a performance and usability study. Assist. Technol. Off. J. RESNA 25:88–98, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Faria, B., Reis, L., Teixeira, S., Faias, J., Lau, N., Intelligent wheelchair simulator for users’ training cerebral palsy children’s case study. In: 8th Iberian conference on information systems and technologies (CISTI). 2013.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Faria, B. M., Vasconcelos, S., Reis, L. P., Lau, N., A methodology for creating intelligent wheelchair users’ profiles. In: ICAART 2012 – 4th International conference on agents and artificial intelligence. pp. 171–179. 2012.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Moussa, M. B., Magnenat-Thalmann, N., Applying affect recognition in serious games: the playmancer project. In: Egges, A., Geraerts, R., Overmars, M., (Eds.), Motion in games. pp. 53–62. Springer, 2009.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gerling, K., Livingston, I., Nacke, L., Mandryk, R., Full-body motion-based game interaction for older adults. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. pp. 1873–1882. ACM, Austin, Texas, USA, 2012.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chang, Y.-J., Chen, S.-F., and Chuang, A.-F., A gesture recognition system to transition autonomously through vocational tasks for individuals with cognitive impairments. Res. Dev. Disabil. 32:2064–2068, 2011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ciger, J., Herbeliny, B., Thalmannz, D., Evaluation of gaze tracking technology for social interaction in virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on modeling and motion capture techniques for virtual environments (CAPTECH04). 2004.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jacob, R. J. K., Karn, K. S., Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: ready to deliver the promises. The mind’s eye: cognitive the mind’s eye: cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research. pp. 573–603. 2003.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mohamed, A. O., Silva, M. P. D., Courboulay, V., A history of eye gaze tracking. Tech. Rep.2008.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cowie, R., Douglas-Cowie, E., Tsapatsoulis, N., Votsis, G., Kollias, S., Fellenz, W., and Taylor, J. G., Emotion recognition in human-computer interaction. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 18:32–80, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Li, S. Z., and Jain, A. K., Handbook of face recognition. Springer Science & Business Media, Germany, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Menache, A., Understanding motion capture for computer animation and video games. Morgan Kaufmann, 2000.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kirishima, T., Sato, K., and Chihara, K., Real-time gesture recognition by learning and selective control of visual interest points. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 27:351–364, 2005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gavrila, D. M., The visual analysis of human movement: a survey. Comput. Vis. Image Underst. 73:82–98, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bradski, G. R., Computer vision face tracking for use in a perceptual user interface. In: Proceedings of the fourth IEEE workshop on applications of computer vision (WACV’98). 1998.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wachs, J. P., Kölsch, M., Stern, H., and Edan, Y., Vision-based hand-gesture applications. Commun. ACM 54:60–71, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Microsoft kinect for Windows. Available: https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/kinect, 2016.
  49. 49.
    Leap motion. Available: https://www.leapmotion.com/ 2016.
  50. 50.
    Duchowski, A. T., A breadth-first survey of eye-tracking applications. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 34:455–470, 2002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Duchowski, A., Eye tracking methodology: theory and practice. Springer Science & Business Media, 2007.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Bulling, A., and Gellersen, H., Toward mobile Eye-based human-computer interaction. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 9:8–12, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Dickie, C., Vertegaal, R., Sohn, C., Cheng, D., Eyelook: using attention to facilitate mobile media consumption. In: Proceedings of the 18th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology. pp. 103–106. ACM, Seattle, WA, USA, 2005.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Zhai, S., Morimoto, C., Ihde, S., Manual and gaze input cascaded (MAGIC) pointing. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: the CHI is the limit. pp. 246–253. ACM, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, 1999.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Tobii. Available: http://www.tobii, 2015.
  56. 56.
    Schneiderman, R., Accuracy, apps advance speech recognition [special reports]. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 32:12–125, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Schroeder, M. R., Computer speech: recognition, compression, synthesis. Springer Science & Business Media, 2004.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Igarashi, T., Hughes, J. F., Voice as sound: using non-verbal voice input for interactive control. In: Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. pp. 155–156. ACM, Orlando, Florida, 2001.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sporka, A. J., Kurniawan, S. H., and Slavík, P., Non-speech operated emulation of keyboard. In: Clarkson, J., Langdon, P., and Robinson, P. (Eds.), Designing accessible technology. Springer London, London, pp. 145–154, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bilmes, J. A., Li, X., Malkin, J., Kilanski, K., Wright, R., Kirchhoff, K., Subramanya, A., Harada, S., Landay, J. A., Dowden, P., Chizeck, H., The vocal joystick: a voice-based human-computer interface for individuals with motor impairments. In: Proceedings of the conference on human language technology and empirical methods in natural language processing. pp. 995–1002. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2005.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Poláček, O., Sporka, A. J., and Míkovec, Z., Measuring performance of a predictive keyboard operated by humming. In: Miesenberger, K., Karshmer, A., Penaz, P., and Zagler, W. (Eds.), Computers helping people with special needs: 13th international conference, ICCHP 2012, Linz, Austria, July 11-13, 2012, proceedings, part II. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, pp. 467–474, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Harada, S., Wobbrock, J. O., and Landay, J. A., Voice games: investigation into the use of Non-speech voice input for making computer games more accessible. In: Campos, P., Graham, N., Jorge, J., Nunes, N., Palanque, P., and Winckler, M. (Eds.), Human-computer interaction – INTERACT 2011: 13th IFIP TC 13 international conference, Lisbon, Portugal, September 5-9, 2011, proceedings, part I. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, pp. 11–29, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Sporka, A. J., Kurniawan, S. H., Mahmud, M., Slavík, P., Non-speech input and speech recognition for real-time control of computer games. In: Proceedings of the 8th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on computers and accessibility. pp. 213–220. ACM, Portland, Oregon, USA, 2006.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pierre-Yves, O., The production and recognition of emotions in speech: features and algorithms. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 59:157–183, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ververidis, D., and Kotropoulos, C., Emotional speech recognition: resources, features, and methods. Speech Comm. 48:1162–1181, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Schiel, F., Steininger, S., Türk, U., The SmartKom multimodal corpus at BAS. In: Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2002). pp. 35–41. 2002.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    France, D. J., Shiavi, R. G., Silverman, S., Silverman, M., and Wilkes, M., Acoustical properties of speech as indicators of depression and suicidal risk. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 47:829–837, 2000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ozdas, A., Shiavi, R. G., Silverman, S. E., Silverman, M. K., and Wilkes, D. M., Investigation of vocal jitter and glottal flow spectrum as possible cues for depression and near-term suicidal risk. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 51:1530–1540, 2004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Schröder, M., Heylen, D., and Poggi, I., Perception of non-verbal emotional listener feedback. In: Hoffmann, R., and Mixdorff, H. (Eds.), Speech prosody 2006, vol. 40. TUDpress, Dresden, pp. 43–46, 2006.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kostoulas, T., Mporas, I., Kocsis, O., Ganchev, T., Katsaounos, N., Santamaria, J. J., Jimenez-Murcia, S., Fernandez-Aranda, F., and Fakotakis, N., Affective speech interface in serious games for supporting therapy of mental disorders. Exp. Syst. Appl. 39:11072–11079, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Hayward, V., Astley, O. R., Cruz-Hernandez, M., Grant, D., and Robles-De-La-Torre, G., Haptic interfaces and devices. Sens. Rev. 24:16–29, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Göger, D., Weiß, K., Burghart, C., Wörn, H., Sensitive skin for a humanoid robot. In: Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on human-centered robotic systems. 2006.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    AAPB. Available: http://www.aapb.org/, 2011.
  74. 74.
    Conconi, A., Ganchev, T., Kocsis, O., Papadopoulos, G., Fernandez-Aranda, F., Jimenez-Murcia, S., PlayMancer: a serious gaming 3D environment. In: International conference on automated solutions for cross media content and multi-channel distribution (AXMEDIS ‘08). pp. 111–117. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 2008.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Nacke, L. E., Kalyn, M., Lough, C., Mandryk, R .L., Biofeedback game design: using direct and indirect physiological control to enhance game interaction. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 103–112. ACM, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2011.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Kuikkaniemi, K., Laitinen, T., Turpeinen, M., Saari, T., Kosunen, I., Ravaja, N., The influence of implicit and explicit biofeedback in first-person shooter games. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. pp. 859–868. ACM, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 2010.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Flynn, S., Palma, P., and Bender, A., Feasibility of using the Sony PlayStation 2 gaming platform for an individual poststroke: a case report. J. Neurol. Phys. Ther. 31:180–189, 2007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Saposnik, G., Teasell, R., Mamdani, M., Hall, J., McIlroy, W., Cheung, D., Thorpe, K., Cohen, L., and Bayley, M., Effectiveness of virtual reality using Wii gaming technology in stroke rehabilitation: a pilot randomized clinical trial and proof of principle. Stroke41:1477–1484, 2010.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Nintendo: Wii console. Available: http://www.nintendo.com/wii/console, 2014.
  80. 80.
    Sony: playstation move. Available: http://pt.playstation.com/psmove/, 2014.
  81. 81.
    Vanacken, L., Notelaers, S., Raymaekers, C., Coninx, K., van den Hoogen, W., Jsselsteijn, W. I., Feys, P., Game-based collaborative training for arm rehabilitation of MS patients: a proof-of-concept game. In: Proceedings of the GameDays 2010. pp. 65–75. 2010.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Battocchi, A., Gal, E., Ben Sasson, A., Painesi, F., Venuti, P., Zancanaro, M., Weiss, P. L., Collaborative puzzle game – an interface for studying collaboration and social interaction for children who are typically developed or who have autistic spectrum disorder. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference series on disability, virtual reality and associated technologies (ICDVRAT). pp. 127–134. 2008.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Battocchi, A., Pianesi, F., Tomasini, D., Zancanaro, M., Esposito, G., Venuti, P., Sasson, A. B., Gal, E., Weiss, P. L., Collaborative puzzle game: a tabletop interactive game for fostering collaboration in children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). In: Proceedings of the ACM international conference on interactive tabletops and surfaces. pp. 197–204. ACM, Banff, Alberta, Canada, 2009.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Caglio, M., Latini-Corazzini, L., D’agata, F., Cauda, F., Sacco, K., Monteverdi, S., Zettin, M., Duca, S., and Geminiani, G., Video game play changes spatial and verbal memory: rehabilitation of a single case with traumatic brain injury. Cogn. Process. 10:195–197, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Cameirão, M. S., Badia, S. B., Zimmerli, L., Oller, E. D., and Vershure, P. F. M. J., The rehabilitation gaming system: a review. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 145:65–83, 2009.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
  87. 87.
    Maia, L., Gaspar, C., Azevedo, M., Loureiro, M. J., and Silva, C. F., Reabilitação cognitiva assistida por computador: o programa RehaCom e a sua utilização no GEARNeurop. Psiquiatr. Clín. 25:83–105, 2004.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Parrot software. Available: http://www.parrotsoftware.com/, 2016.
  89. 89.
    Fundación intras. Available: http://www.intras.es/index.php?id=75, 2014.
  90. 90.
    StatCounter: GlobalStats. Available: http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-ww-monthly-201409-201509-bar, 2015.
  91. 91.
    Bangor, A., Kortum, P., and Miller, J., Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. J. Usability Stud. 4:114–123, 2009.Google Scholar

via A Serious Games Platform for Cognitive Rehabilitation with Preliminary Evaluation | SpringerLink

Advertisements

, , , , ,

Leave a comment

[PDF File] MINDMOTION GO: A PORTABLE VIRTUAL REALITY SYSTEM FOR POST-STROKE REHABILITATION

… After a stroke, patients usually have motor deficiency that reduces the strength and motion range of their limbs. Physiotherapeutic rehabilitation focuses on exercises that train single movements and functions of di8erent body parts: shoulder flexion/extension and abduction/adduction, wrist flexion/extension and radial/ulnar deviation, reaching, hand opening/closing and pinch, trunk axial and lateral rotation, lateral and frontal body weight transfer on the lower limbs.[…]

Download PDF File

, , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Virtual reality and non-invasive brain stimulation in stroke: How effective is their combination for upper limb motor improvement?

Abstract:

Upper limb (UL) hemiparesis is frequently a disabling consequence of stroke. The ability to improve UL functioning is associated with motor relearning and experience dependent neuroplasticity. Interventions such as non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) and task-practice in virtual environments (VEs) can influence motor relearning as well as adaptive plasticity. However, the effectiveness of a combination of NIBS and task-practice in VEs on UL motor improvement has not been systematically examined. The objective of this review was to examine the evidence regarding the effectiveness of combining NIBS with task-practice in VEs on UL motor impairment and activity levels. A systematic review of the published literature was conducted using standard methodology. Study quality was assessed using the PEDro scale and Down’s and Black checklist. Four studies examining the effects of a combination of NIBS (involving transcranial direct current stimulation; tDCS and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; rTMS) were retrieved. Of these, three studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one was a cross-sectional study. There was 1a level evidence that the combination of NIBS and task-practice in a VE was beneficial in the sub-acute stage. A combination of training in a VE with rTMS as well as tDCS was beneficial for motor improvements in the UL in sub-acute stage of stroke (1b level). The combination was not found to be superior compared to task practice in VEs alone in the chronic stage (1b level). The results suggest that people with stroke may be capable of improving levels of motor impairment and activity in the sub-acute stage if their rehabilitation program involves a combination on NIBS and VE training. Emergent questions regarding the use of more sensitive outcomes, different types of stimulation parameters, locations and training environments still need to be addressed.

Source: Virtual reality and non-invasive brain stimulation in stroke: How effective is their combination for upper limb motor improvement? – IEEE Xplore Document

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

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Enhancing clinical implementation of virtual reality

Abstract:

Despite an emerging evidence base and rapid increases in the development of clinically accessible virtual reality (VR) technologies for rehabilitation, clinical adoption remains low. This paper uses the Theoretical Domains Framework to structure an overview of the known barriers and facilitators to clinical uptake of VR and discusses knowledge translation strategies that have been identified or used to target these factors to facilitate adoption. Based on this discussion, we issue a ‘call to action’ to address identified gaps by providing actionable recommendations for development, research and clinical implementation.

Source: Enhancing clinical implementation of virtual reality – IEEE Xplore Document

, , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] A novel approach to integrate VR exer-games for stroke rehabilitation: Evaluating the implementation of a ‘games room’

Abstract:

This study evaluates the integration of virtual reality (VR) exer-games for people post-stroke through the implementation of a “exer-games room” in an inpatient rehabilitation hospital. Qualitative data (interviews with patients and clinicians) and quantitative data (from the first year of operation of the games room) are synthesized and reviewed to provide an overall interpretative evaluation. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) is used to analyze the successful and less successful factors involved in the implementation.

Source: A novel approach to integrate VR exer-games for stroke rehabilitation: Evaluating the implementation of a ‘games room’ – IEEE Xplore Document

, , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Applying a soft-robotic glove as assistive device and training tool with games to support hand function after stroke: Preliminary results on feasibility and potential clinical impact

Published in: Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), 2017 International Conference on

Abstract:

Recent technological developments regarding wearable soft-robotic devices extend beyond the current application of rehabilitation robotics and enable unobtrusive support of the arms and hands during daily activities. In this light, the HandinMind (HiM) system was developed, comprising a soft-robotic, grip supporting glove with an added computer gaming environment. The present study aims to gain first insight into the feasibility of clinical application of the HiM system and its potential impact. In order to do so, both the direct influence of the HiM system on hand function as assistive device and its therapeutic potential, of either assistive or therapeutic use, were explored. A pilot randomized clinical trial was combined with a cross-sectional measurement (comparing performance with and without glove) at baseline in 5 chronic stroke patients, to investigate both the direct assistive and potential therapeutic effects of the HiM system. Extended use of the soft-robotic glove as assistive device at home or with dedicated gaming exercises in a clinical setting was applicable and feasible. A positive assistive effect of the soft-robotic glove was proposed for pinch strength and functional task performance ‘lifting full cans’ in most of the five participants. A potential therapeutic impact was suggested with predominantly improved hand strength in both participants with assistive use, and faster functional task performance in both participants with therapeutic application.

Source: Applying a soft-robotic glove as assistive device and training tool with games to support hand function after stroke: Preliminary results on feasibility and potential clinical impact – IEEE Xplore Document

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

Leave a comment

[Abstract] An adaptive self-organizing fuzzy logic controller in a serious game for motor impairment rehabilitation

Abstract:

Rehabiliation robotics combined with video game technology provides a means of assisting in the rehabilitation of patients with neuromuscular disorders by performing various facilitation movements. The current work presents ReHabGame, a serious game using a fusion of implemented technologies that can be easily used by patients and therapists to assess and enhance sensorimotor performance and also increase the activities in the daily lives of patients. The game allows a player to control avatar movements through a Kinect Xbox, Myo armband and rudder foot pedal, and involves a series of reach-grasp-collect tasks whose difficulty levels are learnt by a fuzzy interface. The orientation, angular velocity, head and spine tilts and other data generated by the player are monitored and saved, whilst the task completion is calculated by solving an inverse kinematics algorithm which orientates the upper limb joints of the avatar. The different values in upper body quantities of movement provide fuzzy input from which crisp output is determined and used to generate an appropriate subsequent rehabilitation game level. The system can thus provide personalised, autonomously-learnt rehabilitation programmes for patients with neuromuscular disorders with superior predictions to guide the development of improved clinical protocols compared to traditional theraputic activities.

Source: An adaptive self-organizing fuzzy logic controller in a serious game for motor impairment rehabilitation – IEEE Xplore Document

, , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[BOOK] Chapter 5: Hand Rehabilitation after Chronic Brain Damage: Effectiveness, Usability and Acceptance of Technological Devices: A Pilot Study – Full Text

THE BOOK:  “Physical Disabilities – Therapeutic Implications”, book edited by Uner Tan, ISBN 978-953-51-3248-6, Print ISBN 978-953-51-3247-9, Published: June 14, 2017 under CC BY 3.0 license. © The Author(s).

CHAPTER 5: By Marta Rodríguez-Hernández, Carmen Fernández-Panadero, Olga López-Martín and Begoña Polonio-López

 

Abstract

Purpose: The aim is to present an overview of existing tools for hand rehabilitation after brain injury and a pilot study to test HandTutor® in patients with chronic brain damage (CBD).

Method: Eighteen patients with CBD have been selected to test perception on effectiveness, usability and acceptance of the device. This group is a sample of people belonging to a wider study consisting in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) that compares: (1) experimental group that received a treatment that combines the use of HandTutor® with conventional occupational therapy (COT) and (2) control group that receives only COT.

Results: Although no statistical significance has been analysed, patients report acceptance and satisfaction with the treatment, decrease of muscle tone, increase of mobility and better performance in activities of daily life. Subjective perceptions have been contrasted with objective measures of the range of motion before and after the session. Although no side effects have been observed after intervention, there has been some usability problems during setup related with putting on gloves in patients with spasticity.

Conclusions: This chapter is a step further of evaluating the acceptance of technological devices in chronic patients with CBD, but more research is needed to validate this preliminary results.

1. Introduction

According to the World Health Organization [1], cerebrovascular accidents (stroke) are the second leading cause of death and the third leading cause of disability. The last update of the global Burden of Ischemic and Haemorrhagic Stroke [2] indicates that although age-standardized rates of stroke mortality have decreased worldwide in the past two decades, the absolute numbers of people who have a stroke every year are increasing. In 2013, there were 10.3 million of new strokes, 6.5 million deaths from stroke, almost 25.7 million stroke survivors and 113 million of people with disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to stroke.

One of the most frequent problems after stroke is upper limb (UL) impairments such as muscle weakness, contractures, changes in muscle tone, and other problems related to coordination of arms, hands or fingers [3, 4]. These impairments induce disabilities in common movements such as reaching, picking up or holding objects and difficult activities of daily living (ADLs) such as washing, eating or dressing, their participation in society, and their professional activities [5]. Most of people experiencing this upper limb impairment will still have problems chronically several years after the stroke. Impairment in the upper limbs is one of the most prevalent consequences of stroke. For this reason making rehabilitation is an essential step towards clinical recovery, patient empowerment and improvement of their quality of life. [6, 7].

Traditionally, therapies are usually provided to patients during their period of hospitalization by physical and occupational therapists and consist in mechanical exercises conducted by the therapists. However, in the last decades, many changes have been introduced in the rehabilitation of post-stroke patients. On the one hand, increasingly, treatments extend in time beyond the period of hospitalization and extend in the space, beyond the hospital to the patient’s home [8]. On the other hand, new agents are involved in treatments, health professionals (doctors, nurses) and non-health professionals (engineers, exercise professionals, carers and family). Most of these changes have been made possible thanks to the development of technology [9].

2. Technological devices for upper limb rehabilitation

In the last 10 years, there has been increasing interest in the use of different technological devices for upper limb (UL) rehabilitation generally [5, 9], and particularly hand rehabilitation for stroke patients [10]. These studies have approached the problem from different points of view: (1) on the one hand, by analysing the physiological and psychophysical characteristics of different devices [11], (2) on the other analysing the key aspects of design and usability [12] and (3) finally studying its effectiveness in therapy [13, 14]. According to Kuchinke [12], these technical devices can be organized into two big groups: (1) on the one hand, devices based on virtual reality (VR) and (2) on the other robotic glove-like devices (GDs).

One of the main advantage of VRs and serious games [15] is to promote task-oriented and repetitive movement training of motor skill while using a variety of stimulating environments and facilitates adherence to treatment in the long term [16]. These devices can be used at home and in most cases do not require special investment in therapeutic hardware because they can use game consumables existing at home such as Nintendo(R) Wii1 [17, 18], Leapmotion2 [19, 20] or Kinect sensor3 [21, 22]. Although first systematic studies based in VRs indicate that there is insufficient evidence to determine its effectiveness compared to conventional therapies [8], more recent studies [13, 14, 23] offer moderate evidence on the benefits of VR for UL motor improvement. Most researchers agree that VRs work well as coadjuvant to complement more conventional therapies; however, further studies with larger samples are needed to identify most suitable type of VR systems, to determine if VR results are sustained in the long term and to define the most appropriate treatment frequency and intensity using VR systems in post-stroke patients.

On the other hand, robotic systems and glove-like devices that provide extrinsic feedback like kinaesthetic and/or tactile stimulation have stronger evidence in the literature that improve motion ability of post-stroke patients [10, 24, 25]. Most of the evidences about effectiveness of GDs are based in pilot studies with non-commercial prototypes [2630], but nowadays, there are also several commercial glove-like devices that support hand rehabilitation therapies for these patients such as HandTutor® [31, 32], Music Glove [3335], Rapael Smart Glove [36] or CyberTouch [16, 37]. The main disadvantages of GDs are price, availability, because they are not yet widespread, and in some case the difficulty of setup handling and ergonomics.

As far as we know, there is little evidence in the literature supporting commercial glove-like devices for hand rehabilitation. This chapter presents a randomized clinical study (RCS) to test HandTutor® System in patients with chronic brain damage (CBD). There are some promising studies that show positive results by applying the HandTutor® in different groups of patients with stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI) [31, 32], but samples include only people who are in the acute or subacute disease or injury but do not include chronic patients. This may be due to the added difficulty of obtaining positive results in interventions aimed at this group, in addition to the characteristics of adaptability and usability of the device that it is also harder for this kind of patients. The present work focuses on hand rehabilitation for chronic post-stroke patients.

3. Experimental design

We have conducted a pilot study (PS) to test acceptance, usability and adaptability of HandTutor® device in patients with chronic brain damage (CBD). This work describes setup, study protocol and preliminary results.

3.1. Participants description

Eligible participants met the following inclusion criteria: (1) At least 18-year age, (2) diagnosed with acquired brain injury: stroke or traumatic brain injury (TBI) and (3) chronic brain damage (more than 24 months from injury). In the final sample, 18 participants aged between 30 and 75 years old, 28% of subjects included in the pilot study are diagnosed with TBI and the remaining 72% of stroke; of these, more than half (56%) have left hemiplegia. The time from injury time exceeds 24 months, reaching 61% of cases 5 years of evolution. All the subjects included in the study attend regularly to a direct care acquired brain injury centre.

3.2. Device description

HandTutor® is a task-oriented device consistent on an ergonomic wearable glove and a laptop with rehabilitation software to enable functional training of hand, wrist and fingers. There are different models to fit both hands (left and right) and different sizes. The system allows the realization of an intensive and repetitive training but, at the same time, is flexible and adaptable to different motor abilities of patients after suffering a neurological, traumatological or rheumatological injury. The software allows the therapist to obtain different types of measures and to customize treatments for different patients, adapting the exercises to their physical and cognitive impairments. The HandTutor® provides augmented feedback and allows the participation of the user in different games that require practising their motor skills to achieve the game objective. Game objectives are highly challenging for patients and promote the improvement of deteriorated skills.

3.3. Study protocol

A randomized clinical trial (RCT) has been conducted with an experimental group and a control group. Participants in the experimental group have been treated with HandTutor® technological device, combined with conventional occupational therapy (set of functional tasks aimed at the mobility of the upper limb in ADLs). The control group only received conventional occupational therapy. All participants in the experimental group attend two weekly sessions with HandTutor®. Both groups received a weekly session of conventional therapy. It is a longitudinal study with pre-post intervention assessment, in which each subject is his control.

This chapter describes the first phase of the RCT, consisting of a pilot study (PS) to test the acceptance, usability and adaptability of the device by patients. For the PS, 18 patients of the global group were selected. Each subject completed four sessions using HandTutor® in both hands and a weekly session of COT. Each session includes quantitative and qualitative evaluation. The former one includes pre-intervention, and post-intervention assessment evaluating passive and active joint range of fingers and wrist, the latter include patients’ interviews and therapist’s observations. During the session, participants receive immediate visual and sensory feedback about their performance during exercises.

Each session includes a pre-intervention assessment and a back, wrist and hand. At the beginning of the session, the therapist evaluated the passive and active joint range of all fingers and wrist (flexion and extension). After the session, patient and therapist reviewed the increased joint range achieved during therapy on the joints involved. The software allows analysing and comparing the minimum and maximum levels in each of the movements required by the exercise. Each session lasts 45 minutes and consists of two exercises that focus their activity in flexion and extension of wrist and fingers independently, reaction speed and accuracy of the selected motion to move some elements included in the exercise.

First exercise of the session consisted in score as many balls as possible in the basket situated at the left of the patient. Every ball came to the patient from his right side. The goal of the second exercise of the session was destroying cylindrical rocks that were going from the right side to a planet situated in the left side. In both exercises, none of the elements appeared at the same height. That is why the patient had to adjust the degrees of flexion and extension of wrist, fingers or both. The occupational therapist could modify the speed, number of balls and minimum and maximum of degrees to achieve the accomplishment.

In addition to the quantitative variables described above, the therapist evaluated with qualitative methodology through interviews and observation, the condition of the skin (redness in the contact area with the glove), increased muscle tone, pain, motivation and difficulty understanding the instructions, level of usability, applicability and functionality of the patient. During the intervention, the therapist verbally corrected offsets trunk and lower limbs, annotating associated reactions in the facial muscles.

4. Results and discussion

All the participants of the experimental group completed the pilot study (n = 18). Table 1 shows the passive and active range of motion (ROM) of the preseason evaluation in fingers and wrist, divided by diagnostic (stroke vs. traumatic brain injury). Every data about ROM is shown in millimetres (average score). In the evaluation, it is noted that the hand of the participants with traumatic brain injury showed lower passive and active joints in all of the fingers (active: V: 9, IV: 10, III: 9, II: 8 and I: 10; passive: V and IV: 14, III: 11, II: 17 and I: 16), except in the wrist (stroke: active 8; passive 23 vs. traumatic brain injury: active 18; passive 20).

Stroke (average in mm) Traumatic brain injury (average in mm)
Range of motion (flexo-extension)
Wrist
Little
Ring
Middle
Index
Thumb
Active

8
11
14.3
11
10
8.3
Passive

23
20.3
22.6
22.6
22.6
20.6
Active

18
9
10
9
8
10
Passive

20
14
14
11
17
16
Active flexion deficit
Wrist
Little
Ring
Middle
Index
Thumb

9
5.6
5
4.3
5.6
9

2
0
0
2
0
1
Active extension deficit
Wrist
Little
Ring
Middle
Index
Thumb

6
3.3
3.3
8.4
7
3.3

0
5
4
0
9
5
Treatments sessions log
Reaction speed
Accuracy
Time in seconds (half)
Number of objects
Primary ranger

10
Full
240
1
Full

10
Full
240
1
Full

Table 1.

Hand ROM evaluation pre-session and treatments sessions log.

Participants with stroke show higher deficits in the flexion active of the first, second and fifth fingers (9, 5.6 and 5.6, respectively), while the extension appears more weakened in the second and third fingers (7 and 8.4, respectively). However, the participants with traumatic brain injury show higher deficit of flexion in the third finger and the extension in the second, fourth and fifth fingers.

In every session, exercises were configured with the same reaction speed and the same number of objects, to allow the participants to achieve the maximum number of hits. Some of them showed deficit of attention, which means that the speed and the increase of stimulations could decrease the final scores and the motivation of the intervention. In the case of the participants who show spasticity, this speed allows them to autorelax and control the hand between the stimulations. The length of exercises were modified according to the muscular and attentional fatigue of the participant, starting with 5 minutes and decreasing, in some cases, up to 3 minutes. All the participants reached the accuracy of movement calculated by the system, according to the preseason ROM evaluation. Also, all of them were allowed to work all of the primary movement range calculated in the evaluation.

At the beginning of the session, the occupational therapist explained the exercise to the participant and conducted a 1-minute test to check understanding. Only was necessary to provide additional verbal instruction to improve comprehension in the 11% of the cases.

Figures 1 and 2 show the ROM evaluation of the hand. In Figure 1, the active evaluation of flexion of wrist and extension of fingers is observed. Figure 2 includes the graphic representation of the millimetres of active movements (in red colour) versus the passive ones (in blue colour) of two hands with left hemiplegia (1 and 2) and two hands of participants with traumatic brain injury (tetraparesis and predominance of affectation in the right hemibody).

media/F1.png

Figure 1.

Hand ROM evaluation (active).

media/F2.png

Figure 2.

Hand ROM evaluation HandTutor® (passive and active).

Figures 3 and 4 display the functioning of the HandTutor® during the intervention. Figure 3 shows the glove with the hand in flexo-extension, while Figure 4 shows the assisted movement of the occupational therapist to obtain the higher ranges of flexion in a participant who shows rigidity and attentional issues. Besides, in the contralateral hand, it can be seen the associated reactions in the top member, which is not forming a part of the intervention. The hand replicates the movement that the occupational therapist is trying to get in the most affected member.

media/F3.png

Figure 3.

Flexo-extension hand with HandTutor®.

media/F4.png

Figure 4.

Example of assisted movement with HandTutor®.

Figures 5 and 6 show maximum and minimum scores for diagnostic. In them, it can be observed the heterogeneity of the flexion and extension movement of the participants in the study. Regarding the wrist, it is not observed huge differences by diagnostic, except in the minimum flexo-extension of the stroke group, especially in the extension. Nevertheless, the articular ranges of the fingers differ until they reach a difference of 20 millimetres in the third finger in the case of the group diagnosed with stroke, coinciding with the group diagnosed with traumatic brain injury.

media/F5.png

Figure 5.

Flexo-extension maximum and minimum of fingers in treatments sessions log.

media/F6.png

Figure 6.

Flexo-extension maximum and minimum of wrist in treatments session logs.

Participants referred increasing satisfaction with this new therapy. During the intervention, the software provided quantitative measures and immediate feedback of variations in patient mobility showing that HandTutor® sensors are highly sensitive to small variations in patient movement. In post-intervention interviews, patients reported that the glove decreases muscle tone of the hand and wrist, allowing ending the session with increased mobility.

All sessions evaluated qualitatively, through an interview, the following parameters: skin condition, motivation, difficulty in the understanding of instructions, level of HandTutor® utility, clinic applicability and satisfaction.

During the sessions, no side effects were observed related to the skin or post-intervention pain related with the hand use. Every participant ended the sessions without any visible injury in the skin (absence of redness, marks or changes in the coloration) and without any kind of pain. This was evaluated both at the end of the session and at the beginning of the next. To be able to contrast the information in relation with the skin condition and the pain, the data were triangulated by asking the participant and his/her primary caregiver the following day of every intervention. In both cases, they confirmed our data.

All participants referred high level of motivation and satisfaction at the end of the intervention due to the perceived higher performance of limb segments and joins involved in the exercises in their activities of daily life (ADLs). The subjective perception of the patient was checked by comparing the ROM (active vs. passive) pre-post measurement session. All participants showed and transmitted a great motivation and satisfaction with the HandTutor® intervention, except for one user. This one presents acoustic, visual and tactile hypersensitivity. After the pilot study, this participant transmitted that the glove, the sound and the images of the system induced in him/her nervousness and rejection. This information was contrasted with caregivers and professionals of the centre.

Some difficulties were found at the following of the exercise instructions, the motivation and interest maintenance during the 11% of the cases, as a consequence of the presence of attention and/or memory impairments.

All participants shared the sensation of decreasing the muscular tone, immediately at the end of every session and transmitted that this feeling stayed all day long, allowing them a higher mobility and independence at the ADLs.

During the study, some problems were observed associated with the difficulty in putting on the HandTutor® glove, especially in hands with high degrees of spasticity, mainly in diagnosed cases of traumatic brain injury (27.8%; Figure 7). Participants with lower ROM valued positively that the exercise was adapted to their possibilities, so they can reach and move objects even with their limited mobility. The 20% of the users valued negatively the weight of the system placed in the forearm, especially those with weak musculature. The occupational therapists reduced the gravity effect including a cradle to facility the placement of the forearm.

media/F7.png

Figure 7.

Spastic hand with HandTutor®.

In those patients that showed sweating, there were placed vinyl or latex gloves on their hands to avoid direct contact with the glove.

Therefore, it seems that the HandTutor® is a device with high degrees of acceptance and usability among patients with CBD.

5. Conclusions

This chapter is a step further of evaluating the acceptance of technological devices in chronic patients with CBD. On one hand, in the theoretical part of the study, we have found in the literature strong evidence confirming the effectiveness of glove-like devices in hand rehabilitation after brain injury, but no so solid evidence of VRs effectiveness over traditional treatment. On the other hand, the practical pilot study to test HandTutor points in the expected direction confirming participants’ satisfaction about effectiveness and ergonomics of glove-like devices, but according to Ref. [12], there are still some issues to be solved in the usability of these devices for patients with spasticity.

The grade of usability of the HandTutor® device with chronic patients with CBD is high; we only find difficulties in those who show attention disorders and/or memory issues or sensorial hypersensibility. The degree of spasticity should also be taken into account in the design of the experience, because difficulties may arise in the placement of the device when the degree of spasticity is high or there is rigidity or other associated reactions.

Most of the studies performed with active gloves similar to HandTutor® device have been performed in patients in the acute or subacute phase of brain damage. It is important to emphasize that in this study, unlike the previous ones, the rehabilitation has been done with patients with more than 24 months of evolution since the diagnosis of the damage and therefore with a very high degree of chronicity in the neurological sequelae. This is one of the main contributions of the presented work since the more time has passed since the diagnosis of brain damage; the more difficult it is to achieve significant improvements with rehabilitation.

In our study, the HandTutor® device has performed effectively for the spasticity treatment in patients with CBD, producing improvements in the performance of the ADLs and elevating the motivation and satisfaction grades with his use in rehabilitation processes. However, this trial does not provide significant statistical evidence about HandTutor® effectiveness, and it would be recommendable to replicate the study with more participants to confirm our findings.

6. Acknowledgements

Work partially funded by SYMBHYO-ITC [MCINN PTQ-15-0705], RESET [MCINN TIN2014-53199-C3-1-R], eMadrid [CAM S2013/ICE-2715] and PhyMEL [UC3M 2015/00402/001] projects. Authors would like to thank Maria Pulido for their feedback in VR devices, and we also want to express our gratitude to the patients involved in the pilot study.

References

1 – Johnson, W., Onuma, O., Owolabic, M., & Sachdeva, S. (2016). Stroke: A global response is needed. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 94:634–634A. doi:10.2471/BLT.16.181636

2 – Feigin, V. L., Krishnamurthi, R. V., Parmar, P., Norrving, B., Mensah, G. A., Bennett, D. A., Barker-Collo S., Moran A.E., Sacco R.L., Truelsen T., Davis S., Pandian J.D., Naghavi M., Forouzanfar M.H., Nguyen G., Johnson C.O., Vos T., Meretoja A., Murray C.J.L. & Roth G.A. (2015). Update on the global burden of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke in 1990–2013: The GBD 2013 study. Neuroepidemiology 45(3): 161–176. doi:10.1159/000441085

3 – Bleyenheuft, Y., & Gordon, A. M. (2014). Precision grip in congenital and acquired hemiparesis: Similarities in impairments and implications for neurorehabilitation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8:459. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00459

4 – Henderson, A., Korner-Bitensky, N., & Levin, M. (2014). Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review of its effectiveness for upper limb motor recovery. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 14(2):52–61. doi:10.1310/tsr1402-52

5 – Hatem, S. M., Saussez, G., della Faille, M., Prist, V., Zhang, X., Dispa, D., & Bleyenheuft, Y. (2016). Rehabilitation of motor function after stroke: A multiple systematic review focused on techniques to stimulate upper extremity recovery. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 10. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2016.00442

6 – Teasell, R. W., Foley, N. C., Bhogal, S. K., & Speechley, M. R. (2015). An evidence-based review of stroke rehabilitation. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 10(1):29–58. doi:10.1310/8YNA-1YHK-YMHB-XTE1

7 – Schneider, E. J., Lannin, N. A., Ada, L., & Schmidt, J. (2016). Increasing the amount of usual rehabilitation improves activity after stroke: A systematic review. Journal of Physiotherapy 62(4):182–187. doi:10.1016/j.jphys.2016.08.006

8 – Coupar, F., Pollock, A., Legg, L. A., Sackley, C., & van Vliet, P. (2012). Home based therapy programmes for upper limb functional recovery following stroke. The Cochrane Database Of Systematic Reviews 16;(5):CD006755. doi:10.1002/14651858. CD006755.pub2/abstract

9 – Pollock, A., Farmer, S. E., Brady, M. C., Langhorne, P., Mead, G. E., Mehrholz, J., & van Wijck, F. (2014). Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. The Cochrane Database Of Systematic Reviews 12;(11):CD010820. doi:10.1002/14651858

10 – Merrett, G. V., Metcalf, C. D., Zheng, D., Cunningham, S., Barrow, S., & Demain, S. H. (2011). Design and qualitative evaluation of tactile devices for stroke rehabilitation. In IET Seminar on Assisted Living, (pp. 1–6). IET London. http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/271802/1/merrett.pdf. doi:10.1049/ic.2011.0025

11 – Demain, S., Metcalf, C. D., Merrett, G. V., Zheng, D., & Cunningham, S. (2013). A narrative review on haptic devices: Relating the physiology and psychophysical properties of the hand to devices for rehabilitation in central nervous system disorders. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 8(3): 181–189. http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/339891/3/haptic_devices.pdf. doi:10.3109/17483107.2012.697532

12 – Kuchinke, L. M., & Bender, B. (2016). Technical view on requirements for future development of hand-held rehabilitation devices. In 6th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob), (pp. 804–809). IEEE Singapore. doi:10.1109/BIOROB.2016.7523726

13 – Laver, K. E., George, S., Thomas, S., Deutsch, J. E., & Crotty, M. (2015). Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. The Cochrane Database Of Systematic Reviews 7;(9):CD008349. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.642439

14 – Viñas-Diz, S., & Sobrido-Prieto, M. (2016). Virtual reality for therapeutic purposes in stroke: A systematic review. Neurología (English Edition), 31(4): 255–277. doi:10.1016/j.nrleng.2015.06.007

15 – Joo, L. Y., Yin, T. S., Xu, D., Thia, E., Chia, P. F., Kuah, C. W. K., & He, K. K. (2010). A feasibility study using interactive commercial off-the-shelf computer gaming in upper limb rehabilitation in patients after stroke. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 42(5): 437–441. doi:10.2340/16501977-0528

16 – Dimbwadyo-Terrer, I., Trincado-Alonso, F., de los Reyes-Guzmán, A., Aznar, M. A., Alcubilla, C., Pérez-Nombela, S., Ama-Espinosa, A., Polonio-López, B. & Gil-Agudo, Á. (2015). Upper limb rehabilitation after spinal cord injury: A treatment based on a data glove and an immersive virtual reality environment. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 11(6):462–467. doi:10.3109/17483107.2015.1027293

17 – Matamoros, M., Negrete, M., Haddad, Y., & Leder, R. S. (2010, March). Nintendo WII remote and Nunchuck as a wireless data subsystem for digital acquisition of analog physiologic data relevant to motor rehabilitation after stroke; part II. In 2010 Pan American Health Care Exchanges (pp. 198–200). Lima, Peru. IEEE. doi:10.1109/PAHCE.2010.5474568

18 – Adie, K., Schofield, C., Berrow, M., Wingham, J., Freeman, J., Humfryes, J., & Pritchard, C. (2014). Does the use of Nintendo Wii Sports™ improve arm function and is it acceptable to patients after stroke? Publication of the Protocol of the Trial of Wii™ in Stroke–TWIST. International Journal of General Medicine 7: 475. doi:10.2147/IJGM.S65379

19 – Eldem, C. (2014). Visual Neglect Assessment and Rehabilitation Using the Leap Motion. Saarbrücken: LAMBERT Academic Publishing

20 – Iosa, M. et al. (2015). Leap motion controlled videogame-based therapy for rehabilitation of elderly patients with subacute stroke: A feasibility pilot study. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 22(4): 306–316. doi:10.1179/1074935714Z.0000000036

21 – Shires, L., Battersby, S., Lewis, J., Brown, D., Sherkat, N., & Standen, P. (2013). Enhancing the tracking capabilities of the Microsoft Kinect for stroke rehabilitation. In IEEE 2nd International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), (pp. 1–8). IEEE Portugal. doi:10.1109/SeGAH.2013.6665316

22 – Bamrungthai, P., & Pleehachinda, W. (2015, November). Development of a game-based system to support stroke rehabilitation using kinect device. In International Conference on Science and Technology (TICST), (pp. 323–326). IEEE London. doi:10.1109/TICST.2015.7369379

23 – Turolla, A., Dam, M., Ventura, L., Tonin, P., Agostini, M., Zucconi, C., & Piron, L. (2013). Virtual reality for the rehabilitation of the upper limb motor function after stroke: A prospective controlled trial. Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation 10(1): 1. doi:10.1186/1743-0003-10-85

24 – Lo, A. C., Guarino, P. D., Richards, L. G., Haselkorn, J. K., Wittenberg, G. F., Federman, D. G., Ringer R.J., Wagner T.H., Krebs H.I., Volpe B.T., Bever C.T.Jr., Bravata D.M., Duncan P.W., Corn B.H., Maffucci A.D., Nadeau S.E., Conroy S.S., Powell J.M., Huang G.D., & Peduzzi P. (2010). Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. New England Journal of Medicine 362(19): 1772–1783. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0911341

25 – Subramanian, S. K., Massie, C. L., Malcolm, M. P., & Levin, M. F. (2010). Does provision of extrinsic feedback result in improved motor learning in the upper limb poststroke? A systematic review of the evidence. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 24(2): 113–124. doi:10.1177/1545968309349941

26 – Huang, M. C., Xu, W., Su, Y., Lange, B., Chang, C. Y., & Sarrafzadeh, M. (2012). Smartglove for upper extremities rehabilitative gaming assessment. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Pervasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (p. 20). ACM Heraklion, Crete, Greece. doi:10.1145/2413097.2413122

27 – Hiob, M. (2016). Interactive glove for mobility training and rehabilitation after stroke. Bachelor Thesis. In Certec – Rehabilitation Engineering and DesignCertec – Rehabilitation Engineering and DesignCertec – Rehabilitation Engineering and DesignCertec report TNS820 20161. Lund University Publications Student Papers. Lund, Sweden.

28 – Kang, B. B., Lee, H., In, H., Jeong, U., Chung, J., & Cho, K. J. (2016). Development of a polymer-based tendon-driven wearable robotic hand. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2016 (pp. 3750–3755). IEEE Stockholm. doi:10.1109/ICRA.2016.7487562

29 – Fischer, H. C., Triandafilou, K. M., Thielbar, K. O., Ochoa, J. M., Lazzaro, E. D., Pacholski, K. A., & Kamper, D. G. (2016). Use of a portable assistive glove to facilitate rehabilitation in stroke survivors with severe hand impairment. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering 24(3): 344–351. doi:10.1109/TNSRE.2015.2513675

30 – Isnin, S. J., Hamid, D. H. T. A. H. & Sunar, S. Design of 3D immersive learning environment to enhanced hand skill after stroke. Man in India 96(6): 1727–1736.

31 – Carmeli, E., Vatine, J. J., Peleg, S., Bartur, G., & Elbo, E. (2009). Upper limb rehabilitation using augmented feedback: Impairment focused augmented feedback with HandTutor®. In 2009 Virtual Rehabilitation International Conference. Haifa, Israel. doi:10.1109/ICVR.2009.5174258

32 – Carmeli, E., Peleg, S., Bartur, G., Elbo, E., & Vatine, J. J. (2011). HandTutor® enhanced hand rehabilitation after stroke—A pilot study. Physiotherapy Research International 16(4): 191–200. doi:10.1002/pri.485

33 – Zondervan, D., Friedman, N. Chang, E., Zhao, X., & Cramer, S. C. (2016). Home-based hand rehabilitation after chronic stroke: Randomized, controlled single-blind trial comparing the MusicGlove with a conventional exercise program. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 53(4): 457. doi:10.1682/JRRD.2015.04.0057

34 – Friedman, N., Chan, V., Zondervan, D., Bachman, M., & Reinkensmeyer, D. J. (2011, August). MusicGlove: Motivating and quantifying hand movement rehabilitation by using functional grips to play music. In 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (pp. 2359–2363). IEEE Boston, Massachusetts, USA doi:10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6090659

35 – Friedman, N., Chan, V., Reinkensmeyer, A. N., Beroukhim, A., Zambrano, G. J., Bachman, M., & Reinkensmeyer, D. J. (2014). Retraining and assessing hand movement after stroke using the MusicGlove: Comparison with conventional hand therapy and isometric grip training. Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation 11(1): 1. doi:10.1186/1743-0003-11-76

36 – Shin, J. H., Kim, M. Y., Lee, J. Y., Jeon, Y. J., Kim, S., Lee, S., Seo B., & Choi, Y. (2016). Effects of virtual reality-based rehabilitation on distal upper extremity function and health-related quality of life: A single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation 13(1): 1. doi:10.1186/s12984-016-0125-x

37 – Kayyali, R., Shirmohammadi, S., El Saddik, A., & Lemaire, E. (2007). Daily-life exercises for haptic motor rehabilitation. In 2007 IEEE International Workshop on Haptic, Audio and Visual Environments and Games (pp. 118–123). IEEE Lyon, France.

Source: Hand Rehabilitation after Chronic Brain Damage: Effectiveness, Usability and Acceptance of Technological Devices: A Pilot Study | InTechOpen

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

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Portable and Reconfigurable Wrist Robot Improves Hand Function for Post-Stroke Subjects  

Abstract:

Rehabilitation robots have become increasingly popular for stroke rehabilitation. However, the high cost of robots hampers their implementation on a large scale. This study implements the concept of a modular and reconfigurable robot, reducing its cost and size by adopting different therapeutic end effectors for different training movements using a single robot. The challenge is to increase the robot’s portability and identify appropriate kinds of modular tools and configurations. Because literature on the effectiveness of this kind of rehabilitation robot is still scarce, this paper presents the design of a portable and reconfigurable rehabilitation robot and describes its use with a group of post-stroke patients for wrist and forearm training. Seven stroke subjects received training using a reconfigurable robot for 30 sessions, lasting 30 minutes per session. Post-training, statistical analysis showed significant improvement of 3.29 points (16.20%, p = 0.027) on the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale for forearm and wrist components (FMA-FW). Significant improvement of active range of motion (AROM) was detected in both pronation-supination (75.59%, p = 0.018) and wrist flexion-extension (56.12%, p = 0.018) after the training. These preliminary results demonstrate that the developed reconfigurable robot could improve subjects’ wrist and forearm movement.

Source: Portable and Reconfigurable Wrist Robot Improves Hand Function for Post-Stroke Subjects – IEEE Xplore Document

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

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Gamification of Hand Rehabilitation Process Using Virtual Reality Tools: Using Leap Motion for Hand Rehabilitation

Abstract:

Nowadays virtual reality (VR) technology give us the considerable opportunities to develop new methods to supplement traditional physiotherapy with sustain beneficial quantity and quality of rehabilitation. VR tools, like Leap motion have received great attention in the recent few years because of their immeasurable applications, whish include gaming, robotics, education, medicine etc. In this paper we present a game for hand rehabilitation using the Leap Motion controller. The main idea of gamification of hand rehabilitation is to help develop the muscle tonus and increase precision in gestures using the opportunities that VR offer by making the rehabilitation process more effective and motivating for patients.

Related Articles

Source: Gamification of Hand Rehabilitation Process Using Virtual Reality Tools: Using Leap Motion for Hand Rehabilitation – IEEE Xplore Document

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: