Development and feasibility study of a sensory-enhanced robot-aided motor training in stroke rehabilitation

Proceedings of the 31st Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society: Engineering the Future of Biomedicine, EMBC 2009

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 5965-5968

  Liu, W ^a   Mukherjee, M ^b   Tsaur, Y ^a   Kim, S H ^c   Liu, H ^a   Natarajan, P ^d   Agah, A ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE   (United States)

^d IBM   (United States)

^e University of Kansas   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CURRICULA; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; MUSCLE; NEUROMUSCULAR REHABILITATION; SOFTWARE TESTING;

CHRONIC STROKE SURVIVORS; EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; SENSORY STIMULATION; STROKE REHABILITATION; STROKE SURVIVORS; TARGET REACHING; VIBRATION STIMULATION;

ROBOTS;

EID: 77950966500     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5334526     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Nakayama, H., et al., Compensation in recovery of upper extremity function after stroke: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1994. 75(8): p. 852-857
2. Bobath, B., Observations on adult hemiplegia and suggestions for treatment. Physiotherapy, 1959. 45: p.279-289
3. Brunnstrom, S., Movement Therapy in Hemiplegia: A Neurophysiological Approach. 1970, Philadelphia, Pa: Harper and Row.
4. Knott, M. and E. Voss, Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation: Patterns and Techniques. 2 ed. 1968, New York, NY: Harper and Row Publishers Inc.
5. Basmajian, J.V., et al., Stroke treatment: comparison of integrated behavioral-physical therapy vs traditional physical therapy programs. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1987. 68(5 Pt 1): p. 267-272
6. Flanagan, E.M., Methods for facilitation and inhibition of motor activity. Am J Phys Med, 1967. 46(1): p. 1006-1011
7. Bourbonnais, D. and S. Vanden Noven, More on muscle strength measurement. Phys Ther, 1989. 69(11): p. 990-994
8. Taub, E., et al., Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1993. 74(4): p.347-354
9. Lum, P.S., et al., Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2002. 83(7): p. 952-959
10. Krebs, H.I., et al., Rehabilitation robotics: pilot trial of a spatial extension for MIT-Manus. J Neuroengineering Rehabil, 2004. 1(1): p. 5.
11. Volpe, B.T., et al., Robotics and other devices in the treatment of patients recovering from stroke. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep, 2005. 5(6): p. 465-470
12. Aisen, M.L., et al., The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Arch Neurol, 1997. 54(4): p. 443-446
13. Parker, V.M., D.T. Wade, and R. Langton Hewer, Loss of arm function after stroke: measurement, frequency, and recovery. Int Rehabil Med, 1986. 8(2): p. 69-73.
14. Jenkins, W.M., M.M. Merzenich, and G. Recanzone, Neocortical representational dynamics in adult primates: implications for neuropsychology. Neuropsychologia, 1990. 28(6): p. 573-584
15. Broeks, J.G., et al., The long-term outcome of arm function after stroke: results of a follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil, 1999. 21(8): p. 357-364
16. Kusoffsky, A., I. Wadell, and B.Y. Nilsson, The relationship between sensory impairment and motor recovery in patients with hemiplegia. Scand J Rehabil Med, 1982. 14(1): p. 27-32.
17. Hogan, N., et al. MIT-MANUS: A workstation for manual therapy and training I. in IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication. 1992. Tokyo, Japan.
18. Hogan, N., H.I. Krebs, and J. Charnnarong, Interactive robotic therapist. 1995, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
19. Krebs, H.I., et al., Robot-aided neurorehabilitation. IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering, 1998. 6(1): p. 75-87.
20. Fearing, R.S., G. Moy, and E. Tan. Some basic issues in teletaction. in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 1997. Albuquerque, NM.
21. Liu, W., et al., Overcoming age-related sensory loss with mechanical noise Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2002. 83: p. 171-176.
22. Wagner, C.R., S.J. Lederman, and R.D. Howe. A tactile shape display using RC servomotors. in 10th International Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems. 2002. Orlando, Florida.
23. Ferraro, M., et al., Assessing the motor status score: a scale for the evaluation of upper limb motor outcomes in patients after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2002. 16(3): p. 283-289
24. Krebs, H.I., et al., Robot-aided functional imaging: application to a motor learning study. Hum Brain Mapp, 1998. 6(1): p. 59-72.
25. Volpe, B.T., et al., Robot training enhanced motor outcome in patients with stroke maintained over 3 years. Neurology, 1999. 53(8): p. 1874-1876
26. Dannenbaum, R.M. and R.W. Dykes, Sensory loss in the hand after sensory stroke: therapeutic rationale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1988. 69(10): p. 833-839
27. Nudo, R.J., Recovery after damage to motor cortical areas. Curr Opin Neurobiol, 1999. 9(6): p. 740-747