Comparison of three-dimensional, assist-as-needed robotic arm/hand movement training provided with pneu-wrex to conventional tabletop therapy after chronic stroke

American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Volumn 91, Issue 11 SUPPL.3, 2012, Pages

  Reinkensmeyer, David J ^a   Wolbrecht, Eric T ^c   Chan, Vicky ^a   Chou, Cathy ^a   Cramer, Steven C ^a,b   Bobrow, James E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO   (United States)

Author keywords

Arm; Movement; Rehabilitation; Robotics; Stroke

Indexed keywords

ARM; ARTICLE; BRAIN HEMORRHAGE; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HAND; HAND STRENGTH; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; ORTHOSIS; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; ROBOTICS; TASK PERFORMANCE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ARM; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; CEREBRAL HEMORRHAGE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HAND; HAND STRENGTH; HUMANS; ORTHOTIC DEVICES; ROBOTICS; STROKE; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84871857736     PISSN: 08949115     EISSN: 15377385     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31826bce79     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Adamovich SV, Fluet GG, Tunik E, et al: Sensori-motor training in virtual reality: A review. Neuro-Rehabilitation 2009;25:29-44
2. Brewer BR, McDowell SK, Worthen-Chaudhari LC: Poststroke upper extremity rehabilitation: A review of robotic systems and clinical results. Top Stroke Rehabil 2007;14:22-44
3. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, Krebs HI: Effects of robotassisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: A systematic review. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008;22:111-21
4. Prange GB, Jannink MJA, Groothuis CGM, et al: Systematic review of the effect of robot-aided therapy on recovery of the hemiparetic arm after stroke. J Rehabil Res Dev 2006;43:171-84
5. Lo AC, Guarino PD, Richards LG, et al: Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1772-83
6. Sanchez RJ, Wolbrecht E, Smith R, et al: A pneumatic robot for re-training arm movement after stroke: Rationale and mechanical design. 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Chicago, IL, 2005. ICORR 2005; 2005: 500-4
7. Wolbrecht ET, Chan V, Reinkensmeyer DJ, et al: Optimizing compliant, model-based robotic assistance to promote neurorehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2008;16:286-97
8. Wolbrecht ET, Chan V, Reinkensmeyer DJ, et al: Pneumatic control of robots for rehabilitation. Int J Robot Res 2010;29:23-38
9. Sanchez RJ, Liu J, Rao S, et al: Automating arm movement training following severe stroke: Functional exercises with quantitative feedback in a gravity-reduced environment. IEEE Trans Neural Rehabil Eng 2006;14:378-89
10. Rahman T, Sample W, Seliktar R, et al: A body-powered functional upper limb orthosis. J Rehabil Res Dev 2000;37:675-80
11. 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: 505-14
12. Israel JF, Campbell DD, Kahn JH, et al: Metabolic costs and muscle activity patterns during robotic-and therapist-assisted treadmill walking in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury. Phys Ther 2006;86:1466-78
13. Lippman LG, Rees R. Consequences of error production in a perceptual-motor task. J Gen Psychol 1997;124:133-42
14. van Asseldonk EH, Wessels M, Stienen AH, et al: Influence of haptic guidance in learning a novel visuo-motor task. J Physiol Paris 2009;103:276-85
15. Milot MH, Marchal-Crespo L, Green CS, et al: Comparison of error amplification and haptic guidance training techniques for learning of a timing-based motor task by healthy individuals. Exp Brain Res 2009;201:119-31
16. Heuer H, Rapp K: Active error corrections enhance adaptation to a visuo-motor rotation. Exp Brain Res 2011;211:97-108
17. Hu XL, Tong KY, Song R, et al: A comparison between electromyography- driven robot and passive motion device on wrist rehabilitation for chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009;23:837-46
18. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Maier MA, Guigon E, et al: Do Robotic and non-robotic arm movement training drive motor recovery after stroke by a common neural mechanism? Experimental evidence and a computational model. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Conference; Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2009:2439-41
19. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, et al: The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med 1975; 7:13-31
20. 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;16:232-40
21. Wilson DJ, Baker LL, Craddock JA: Protocol: Functional Test for the Hemiplegic/Paretic Upper Extremity. Downey, CA: Los Amigos Research and Education Institute, 1984
22. van der Lee JH, Beckerman H, Knol DL, et al. Clinimetric properties of the Motor Activity Log for the assessment of arm use in hemiparetic patients. Stroke 2004;35:1410-4
23. Mathiowetz V, Volland G, Kashman N, et al: Adult norms for the Box and Block Test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther 1985;39:386-91
24. Lincoln NB, Jackson JM, Adams SA: Reliability and revision of the Nottingham Sensory Assessment for stroke patients. Physiotherapy 1998;84:358-65
25. Saville DJ. Multiple comparison procedures: The practical solution. Am Statistician 1990;44:174-80
26. Takahashi CD, Der-Yeghiaian L, Le V, et al: Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke. Brain 2008; 131(pt 2):425-37
27. Scheidt RA, Reinkensmeyer DJ, Conditt MA, et al: Persistence of motor adaptation during constrained, multi-joint, arm movements. J Neurophysiol 2000;84: 853-62
28. Emken JL, Benitez R, Sideris A, et al: Motor adaptation as a greedy optimization of error and effort. J Neurophysiol 2007;97:3997-4006
29. Taylor NF, Dodd KJ, Damiano DL: Progressive resistance exercise in physical therapy: A summary of systematic reviews. Phys Ther 2005;85:1208-23
30. Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, 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;83:952-9
31. Koski L, Mernar TJ, Dobkin BH: Immediate and longterm changes in corticomotor output in response to rehabilitation: Correlation with functional improvements in chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2004;18:230-49
32. Cowles M, Davis C: On the origins of the .05 level of statistical significance. Am Psychol 1982;37:553-8
33. Riley JD, LeV, Der-Yeghiaian L, et al. Anatomy of stroke injury predicts gains from therapy. Stroke 2011; 42:421-6
34. Lang CE, Macdonald JR, Reisman DSet al: Observation of amounts of movement practice provided during stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2009;90:1692-8
35. Stinear CM: Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain 2007;130(pt 1):170-80
36. Cramer SC, Parrish TB, Levy RM, et al: Predicting functional gains in a stroke trial. Stroke 2007;38: 2108-14
37. Courtine G, Gerasimenko Y, van den Brand R, et al: Transformation of nonfunctional spinal circuits into functional states after the loss of brain input. Nat Neurosci 2009;12:333-42