Telerehabilitation robotics: Bright lights, big future?

Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development

Volumn 43, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 695-710

  Carignan, Craig R ^a,c   Krebs, Hermano I ^b  

^a GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Bilateral; Cooperative therapy; Force feedback; Functional rehabilitation; Haptics; Rehabilitation robotics; Shared virtual environments; Teleoperation; Telerehabilitation; Time delay; Virtual reality

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED DIAGNOSIS; INTERNET; MOTION ESTIMATION; PATIENT REHABILITATION; PATIENT TREATMENT; VIRTUAL REALITY;

COOPERATIVE THERAPY; FORCE FEEDBACK; FUNCTIONAL REHABILITATION; REHABILITATION ROBOTICS; SHARED VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS; TELEREHABILITATION ROBOTICS;

ROBOTIC ARMS;

COMPUTER PROGRAM; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FORCE; FUTUROLOGY; HOME CARE; HUMAN; INTERNET; MOTION; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REHABILITATION CARE; REVIEW; ROBOTICS; TELEMEDICINE;

EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FORECASTING; HUMANS; REHABILITATION; ROBOTICS; TELEMEDICINE;

EID: 33751051711     PISSN: 07487711     EISSN: 07487711     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2005.05.0085     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Mackay J, Mensah GA. The atlas of heart disease and stroke. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization; 2004.
2. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division [home page on the Internet]. New York (NY): United Nations; c2006 [updated 2006; 2006 Jan]. World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision Population Database; [about 1 screen]. Available from: http://esa.un.org/unpp/
3. Ottenbacher KJ, Smith PM, Illig SB, Linn RT, Ostir GV, Granger CV. Trends in length of stay, living setting, functional outcome, and mortality following medical rehabilitation. JAMA. 2004;292(14):1687-95.
4. Guthart G, Salisbury J Jr. The intuitive telesurgery system: Overview and application. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation; 2000 Apr 24-28; San Francisco, CA. New York: IEEE; 2000. p. 618-22.
5. Krebs HI, Hogan N, Aisen ML, Volpe BT. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 1998;6(1):75-87.
6. Jadvah C, Krovi V. A low-cost framework for individualized interactive telerehabilitation. Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference in IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBS); 2004 Sep 1-5; San Francisco, CA. New York: IEEE; 2004. p. 3297-3300.
7. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Pang CT, Nessler JA, Painter CC. Web-based telerehabilitation for the upper extremity after stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2002;10(2):102-8.
8. Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Edelstein L, Diels CM, Aisen ML. Robot training enhanced motor outcome in patients with stroke maintained over 3 years. Neurology. 1999;53(8):1874-76.
9. Popescu VG, Burdea GC, Bouzit M, Hentz VR. A virtual-reality-based telerehabilitation system with force feedback. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2000;4(1):45-51.
10. Olsson AP, Carignan CR, Tang J. Cooperative control of virtual objects using haptic teleoperation over the internet. In: Sharkey, McCrindle, Brown, editors. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies; 2004 Sep 20-22; New College, Oxford, England. p. 149-56.
11. Goncharenko I, Svinin M, Matsumoto S, Masui Y, Kanou Y, Hosoe S. Cooperative control with haptic visualization in shared virtual environments. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Information Visualization; 2004 Jul 14-16; London, England. Los Alamitos (CA): IEEE Computer Society; 2004. p. 533-38.
12. Basdogan C, Ho C-H, Srinivasan MA, Slater M. An experimental study on the role of touch in shared virtual environments. ACM Trans Computer-Human Interaction. 2000;7(4):443-60.
13. Ishibashi Y, Hasegawa T, Tasaka S. Group synchronization control for haptic media in networked virtual environments. Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems; 2004 Mar 27-28; Chicago, IL. Los Alamitos (CA): IEEE Computer Society; 2004. p. 106-13.
14. Kim J, Kim H, Tay B, Muniyandi M, Srinivasan M, Jordan J, Mortensen J, Oliveira M, Slater M. Transatlantic touch: A study of haptic collaboration over long distance. Presence. 2004;13(3):328-37.
15. Carignan CR, Olsson PA. Cooperative control of virtual objects over the Internet using force-reflecting master arms. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation; 2004 Apr 26-May 1; New Orleans, LA. New York: IEEE; 2004. p. 1221-26.
16. Massie T, Salisbury JK. The PHANTOM haptic interface: A device for probing virtual objects. Proceedings of the ASME Winter Annual Meeting Symposium of Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems; 1994 Nov; Chicago, IL. p. 295-300.
17. Lee W-S, Kim J-H, Cho J-H. A driving simulator as a virtual reality Tool. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation; 1998 May 16-20; Leuven, Belgium. New York: IEEE; 1998. p. 71-76.
18. Clover C, Luecke G, Troy J, McNeely W. Dynamic simulation of virtual mechanisms using industrial robotics equipment. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA); 1997 Apr 20-25; Albuquerque, NM. New York: IEEE; 1997. p. 724-30.
19. Carignan CR, Akin DL. Using robots for astronaut training. IEEE Control Syst Magazine. 2003;23(2):46-59.
20. Burdea GC. Actuators. In: Force and touch feedback for virtual reality. New York (NY): John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1996. p. 71-73.
21. Tsagarakis N, Caldwell DG, Medrano-Cerda GA. A 7 DOF pneumatic muscle actuator (pMA) powered exoskeleton. Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Robot and Human Interaction; 1999; Pisa, Italy. New York: IEEE; 1999. p. 327-33.
22. Umetani Y, Yamada Y, Morizono T, Yoshida T, Aoki S. "Skil Mate" wearable exoskeleton robot. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. 4; 1999 Oct 12-15; Tokyo, Japan. New York: IEEE; 1999. p. 984-88.
23. Yokokohji Y, Hollis RL, Kanade T. What you can see is what you can feel - Development of a visual/haptic interface to virtual environment. Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium; 1996; Los Alamitos, CA. New York: IEEE; 1996. p. 46-53.
24. Buoguila L, Ishii M, Sato M. Effect of coupling haptics and stereopsis on depth perception in virtual environment. Proceedings of the Workshop on Haptic Human-Computer Interaction; 2000 Aug 31-Sep 1; Glasgow, Scotland. Germany: Springer Berlin/Heidelberg; 2001. p. 54-62.
25. Stewart P, Buttolo P. Putting people power into virtual reality. Mech Eng Design. 1999;1(1):18-22.
26. Freedman DH. Holograms in motion. Technol Rev. 2002;105(9):48-55.
27. Buerger SP, Palazzolo JJ, Krebs HI, Hogan N. Rehabilitation robotics: Adapting robot behavior to suit patient needs and abilities. Proceedings of the American Control Conference; 2004 Jun 30-Jul 1; Boston, MA. New York: IEEE; 2004. p. 3239-44.
28. Hogan N. Impedance control: An approach to manipulation. Parts 1-3. J Dyn Syst Measure Control. 1985;107:1-24.
29. Krebs HI, Palazzolo JJ, Dipietro L, Ferraro M, Krol J, Rannekleiv K, Volpe BT, Hogan N. Rehabilitation robotics: Performance-based progressive robot-assisted therapy. Auton Robots. 2003;15(1):7-20.
30. Lane JC, Carignan C, Sullivan BR, Akin DL, Hunt T, Cohen R. Effects of time delay on telerobotic control of neutral buoyancy vehicles. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation; 2002 May 11-14; Washington, DC. New York: IEEE; 2002. p. 2874-79.
31. Anderson RJ, Spong MW. Bilateral control of teleoperators with time delay. Proceedings of the 27th IEEE Conference on Precision and Control, Vol. 1; 1988 Dec 7-9; Austin, TX. New York: IEEE; 1988. p. 167-73.
32. Niemeyer G, Slotine J-J. Towards force reflecting teleoperation over the Internet. Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 3; 1998 May 16-20; Leuven, Belgium. New York: IEEE; 1998. p. 1909-15.
33. Imaida T, Yokokohji Y, Doi T, Oda M, Yoshikawa T. Ground-space bilateral teleoperation experiment using ETS-VII robot arm with direct kinesthetic coupling. Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 1; 2001 May 21-26; Seoul, Korea. New York: IEEE; 2001. p. 1031-38.
34. Loureiro RC, Collin CF, Harwin WS. Robot aided therapy: Challenges ahead for upper limb stroke rehabilitation. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies; 2004 Sep 20-22; New College, Oxford, England. p. 33-39.
35. Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Ferraro M, Fasoli S, Palazzolo J, Rohrer B, Edelstein L, Hogan N. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation: From evidence-based to science-based rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2002;8(4):54-70.
36. Roderick SN, Carignan CR. An approach to designing software safety systems for rehabilitation robots. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics; 2005 Jun 28-Jul 1; Chicago, IL. p. 252-57.
37. Hogan N, Krebs HI, Sharon A, Charnnarong J, inventors. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, assignee. Interactive robot therapist. United States patent US 5466213. 1995 Nov 14.
38. Wu C-Y, Trombly CA, Lin K-C, Tickle-Degnen L. Effects of object affordances on movement performance: A meta-analysis. Scand J Occup Ther. 1998;5:83-92.
39. Hall BA, Nelson DL. The effect of materials on performance: A kinematic analysis of eating. Scand J Occup Ther. 1998;5:68-81.
40. Hsieh CL, Nelson DL, Smith DA, Peterson CQ. A comparison of performance in added-purpose occupations and rote exercise for dynamic standing balance in persons with hemiplegia. Am J Occup Ther. 1996;50(1):10-16.
41. Wu CY, Trombly CA, Lin K, Tickle-Degnen L. A kinematic study of contextual effects of reaching performance in persons with and without stroke: Influences of object availability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81(1):95-101.
42. Carignan C, Liszka M. Design of an arm exoskeleton with scapula motion for shoulder rehabilitation. Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Robotics; 2005 Jul 18-20; Seattle, WA. p. 524-31.
43. Aisen ML, Krebs HI, Hogan N, McDowell F, Volpe BT. The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Arch Neurol. 1997;54(4):443-46.
44. Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Aisen ML, Hogan N. Increasing productivity and quality of care: Robot-aided neuro-rehabilitation. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000;37(6):639-52.
45. Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Edelstein L, Diels C, Aisen ML. A novel approach to stroke rehabilitation: Robot-aided sensorimotor stimulation. Neurology. 2000;54(10):1938-44.
46. Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N. Is robot-aided sensorimotor training in stroke rehabilitation a realistic option? Curr Opin Neurol. 2001;14(6):745-52.
47. Ferraro M, Palazzolo JJ, Krol J, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Volpe BT. Robot-aided sensorimotor arm training improves outcome in patients with chronic stroke. Neurology. 2003;61(11):1604-7.
48. Fasoli S, Krebs HI, Stein J, Frontera WR, Hogan N. Effects of robotic therapy on motor impairment and recovery in chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(4):477-82.
49. Fasoli S, Krebs HI, Stein J, Frontera WR, Hughes R, Hogan N. Robotic therapy for chronic motor impairments after stroke: Follow-up results. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(7):1106-11.
50. Stein J, Krebs HI, Frontera WR, Fasoli SE, Hughes R, Hogan N. Comparison of two techniques of robot-aided upper limb exercise training after stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;83(9):720-28.
51. Trombly CA. Conceptual foundations for practice. In: Trombly CA, Radomski MV, editors. Occupational therapy for physical dysfunction. 5th ed. Boston (MA): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002. p. 1-15.
52. Padilla S. Device gives stroke patients independence. Phoenix (AZ): The Business Journal of Phoenix. 2003 Jul 14.