A robotic device as a sensitive quantitative tool to assess upper limb impairments in stroke patients: A preliminary prospective cohort study

Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 210-217

  Gilliaux, Maxime ^a   Lejeune, Thierry ^a   Detrembleur, Chiristine ^a   Sapin, Julien ^b   Dehez, Bruno ^b   Stoquart, Gaëtan ^a  

^a CLINIQUES UNIVERSITAIRES SAINT LUC   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITÉ CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Biomechanics; Outcome assessment; Robotics; Stroke; Upper extremity

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARM; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISABILITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); PARESIS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; ROBOTICS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TASK PERFORMANCE;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOMECHANICS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOVEMENT; PARESIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROBOTICS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; UPPER EXTREMITY;

EID: 84857823473     PISSN: 16501977     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0926     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Mackay J, Mensah GA. Atlas of heart disease and stroke. brighton: Myriad; 2004.
2. Duncan PW, Zorowitz R, Bates B, Choi J Y, Glasberg JJ, Graham GD, et al. Management of adult stroke rehabilitation care: a clinical practice guideline. Stroke 2005; 36: 100-143.
3. Ward NS. The neural substrates of motor recovery after focal damage to the central nervous system. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87: 30-35. (Pubitemid 44820037)
4. Hayward K, Barker R, Brauer S. Interventions to promote upper limb recovery in stroke survivors with severe paresis: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil 2010; 32: 1973-1986.
5. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, Krebs HI. effects of robot-assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Neurore-habil Neural Repair 2008; 22: 111-121. (Pubitemid 351287594)
6. Mehrholz J, Platz T, Kugler J, Pohl M. electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving arm function and activities of daily living after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; (4): CD006876.
7. Pignolo L. Robotics in neuro-rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med 2009; 41: 955-960.
8. Prange GB, Jannink MJ, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Hermens HJ, Ijzerman MJ. Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev 2006; 43: 171-184.
9. Sivan M, O'Connor R, Makower S, Levesley M, Bhakta B. Systematic review of the outcome measures used in the evaluation of robot-assisted upper limb exercise in stroke. J Rehabil Med 2011; 43: 181-189.
10. Daly JJ, Hogan N, Perepezko EM, Krebs HO, Rogers JM, Goyal KS, et al. Response to upper-limb robotics and functional neuro-muscular stimulation following stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42: 723-736. (Pubitemid 43793502)
11. Finley MA, Fasoli SE, Dipietro L, Ohlhoff J, Macclellan L, Meister C, et al. Short-duration robotic therapy in stroke patients with severe upper-limb motor impairment. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42: 683-692.
12. Kahn LE, Zygman ML, Rymer WZ, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Robot-assisted reaching exercise promotes arm movement recovery in chronic hemiparetic stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2006; 3: 1-13.
13. Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Palazzolo J, Rohrer B, Ferraro M, Fasoli S, et al. Robot-aided neuro-rehabilitation in stroke: interim results on the follow-up of 76 patients and on movement performance indices. In: Mokhtari M, Editor. Integration of assistive technology in the information age. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2001, P. 45-59.
14. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Kahn LE, Averbuch M, McKenna-Cole A, Schmit BD, Rymer WZ. Understanding and treating arm movement impairment after chronic brain injury: progress with the ARM guide. J Rehabil Res Dev 2000; 37: 653-662.
15. Rohrer B, Fasoli S, Krebs HI, Hughes R, Volpe B, Frontera WR, et al. Movement smoothness changes during stroke recovery. J Neurosci 2002; 22: 8297-8304. (Pubitemid 35379135)
16. Ellis MD, Sukal T, DeMott T, Dewald JP. Augmenting clinical evaluation of hemiparetic arm movement with a laboratory-based quantitative measurement of kinematics as a function of limb loading. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008; 22: 321-329. (Pubitemid 351852642)
17. Feng X, Winters JM. A pilot study evaluating use of a computer-assisted neurorehabilitation platform for upper-extremity stroke assessment. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2009; 6: 1-15.
18. Gregson JM, Leathley MJ, Moore AP, Smith TL, Sharma AK, Wat-kins CL. Reliability of measurements of muscle tone and muscle power in stroke patients. Age Ageing 2000; 29: 223-228. (Pubitemid 30316206)
19. Chino N, Sonoda S, Domen K, Saitoh E, Kimura A. Stroke impairment assessment set. In: Chino N, Melvin JL, Editors. Functional evaluation of stroke patient. Tokyo: Springer; 1996: 19-31.
20. Penta M, Tesio L, Arnould C, Zancan A, Thonnard JL. The ABIL-hAND questionnaire as a measure of manual ability in chronic stroke patients Rasch-based validation and relationship to upper limb impairment. Stroke 2001; 32: 1627-1634. (Pubitemid 32631915)
21. Sapin S. Conception d'un robot interactif pour la réé ducation des membres supérieurs de patients céré brolésés [PhD thesis]. Louvain-la-Neuve: Université catholique de Louvain; 2010.
22. Lance JW. disordered muscle tone and movement. Clin exp neurol 1981; 18: 27-35.
23. Dipietro L, Krebs HI, Fasoli SE, Volpe BT, Stein J, Bever C, et al. Changing motor synergies in chronic stroke. J Neurophysiol 2007; 98: 757-768. (Pubitemid 47236030)
24. Dukelow SP, Herter TM, Moore KD, Demers MJ, Glasgow JI, Bagg SD, et al. quantitative assessment of limb position sense following stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010; 24: 178-187.
25. Bosecker C, Dipietro L, Volpe B, Krebs HI. Kinematic robot-based evaluation scales and clinical counterparts to measure upper limb motor performance in patients with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2010; 24: 62-69.
26. Abdullah HA, Tarry C, Datta R, Mittal GS, Abderrahim M. Dynamic biomechanical model for assessing and monitoring robot-assisted upper-limb therapy. J Rehabil Res Dev 2007; 44: 43-62.
27. Fazekas G, Horvath M, Troznai T, Toth A. Robot-mediated upper limb physiotherapy for patients with spastic hemiparesis: a preliminary study. J Rehabil Med 2007; 39: 580-582. (Pubitemid 47455228)
28. Housman SJ, Scott KM, Reinkensmeyer DJ. A randomized controlled trial of gravity-supported, Computer-enhanced arm exercise for individuals with severe hemiparesis. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009; 23: 505-514.
29. Jarrassé N, Tagliabue M, Robertson JV, Maiza A, Crocher V, Roby-brami A, et al. A methodology to quantify alterations in human upper limb movement during co-manipulation with an exoskeleton. Ieee Trans Neural Syst Rehabil eng 2010; 18: 389-397.
30. Nef T, Quinter G, Müller R, Riener R. effects of arm training with the robotic device ARMin I in chronic stroke: three single cases. Neurodegener Dis 2009; 6: 240-251.
31. Staubli P, Nef T, Klamroth-Marganska V, Riener R. effects of intensive arm training with the rehabilitation robot ARMin II in chronic stroke patients: four single-cases. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2009; 6: 1-10.
32. Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE. The Fugl-Meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2002; 16: 232-240. (Pubitemid 34984898)
33. Wagner JM, Rhodes JA, Patten C. Reproducibility and minimal detectable change of three-dimensional kinematic analysis of reaching tasks in people with hemiparesis after stroke. Phys Ther 2008; 88: 652-663. (Pubitemid 351620016)