File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Distal versus proximal - An investigation on different supportive strategies by robots for upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: A randomized controlled trial

TitleDistal versus proximal - An investigation on different supportive strategies by robots for upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: A randomized controlled trial
Authors
KeywordsNMES-robot
Stroke rehabilitation
Supporting strategy
Upper extremity
Issue Date2019
Citation
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 2019, v. 16, n. 1, article no. 64 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Different mechanical supporting strategies to the joints in the upper extremity (UE) may lead to varied rehabilitative effects after stroke. This study compared the rehabilitation effectiveness achieved by electromyography (EMG)-driven neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES)-robotic systems when supporting to the distal fingers and to the proximal (wrist-elbow) joints. Methods: Thirty subjects with chronic stroke were randomly assigned to receive motor trainings with NMES-robotic support to the finger joints (hand group, n = 15) and with support to the wrist-elbow joints (sleeve group, n = 15). The training effects were evaluated by the clinical scores of Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) before and after the trainings, as well as 3 months later. The cross-session EMG monitoring of EMG activation level and co-contraction index (CI) were also applied to investigate the recovery progress of muscle activations and muscle coordination patterns through the training sessions. Results: Significant improvements (P < 0.05) in FMA full score, FMA shoulder/elbow (FMA-SE) and ARAT scores were found in both groups, whereas significant improvements (P < 0.05) in FMA wrist/hand (FMA-WH) and MAS scores were only observed in the hand group. Significant decrease of EMG activation levels (P < 0.05) of UE flexors was observed in both groups. Significant decrease in CI values (P < 0.05) was observed in both groups in the muscle pairs of biceps brachii and triceps brachii (BIC&TRI) and the wrist-finger flexors (flexor carpi radialis-flexor digitorum) and TRI (FCR-FD&TRI). The EMG activation levels and CIs of the hand group exhibited faster reductions across the training sessions than the sleeve group (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Robotic supports to either the distal fingers or the proximal elbow-wrist could achieve motor improvements in UE. The robotic support directly to the distal fingers was more effective than to the proximal parts in improving finger motor functions and in releasing muscle spasticity in the whole UE.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/325435
PubMed Central ID
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorQian, Qiuyang-
dc.contributor.authorNam, Chingyi-
dc.contributor.authorGuo, Ziqi-
dc.contributor.authorHuang, Yanhuan-
dc.contributor.authorHu, Xiaoling-
dc.contributor.authorNg, Stephanie C.-
dc.contributor.authorZheng, Yongping-
dc.contributor.authorPoon, Waisang-
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-27T07:33:17Z-
dc.date.available2023-02-27T07:33:17Z-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 2019, v. 16, n. 1, article no. 64-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/325435-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Different mechanical supporting strategies to the joints in the upper extremity (UE) may lead to varied rehabilitative effects after stroke. This study compared the rehabilitation effectiveness achieved by electromyography (EMG)-driven neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES)-robotic systems when supporting to the distal fingers and to the proximal (wrist-elbow) joints. Methods: Thirty subjects with chronic stroke were randomly assigned to receive motor trainings with NMES-robotic support to the finger joints (hand group, n = 15) and with support to the wrist-elbow joints (sleeve group, n = 15). The training effects were evaluated by the clinical scores of Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) before and after the trainings, as well as 3 months later. The cross-session EMG monitoring of EMG activation level and co-contraction index (CI) were also applied to investigate the recovery progress of muscle activations and muscle coordination patterns through the training sessions. Results: Significant improvements (P < 0.05) in FMA full score, FMA shoulder/elbow (FMA-SE) and ARAT scores were found in both groups, whereas significant improvements (P < 0.05) in FMA wrist/hand (FMA-WH) and MAS scores were only observed in the hand group. Significant decrease of EMG activation levels (P < 0.05) of UE flexors was observed in both groups. Significant decrease in CI values (P < 0.05) was observed in both groups in the muscle pairs of biceps brachii and triceps brachii (BIC&TRI) and the wrist-finger flexors (flexor carpi radialis-flexor digitorum) and TRI (FCR-FD&TRI). The EMG activation levels and CIs of the hand group exhibited faster reductions across the training sessions than the sleeve group (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Robotic supports to either the distal fingers or the proximal elbow-wrist could achieve motor improvements in UE. The robotic support directly to the distal fingers was more effective than to the proximal parts in improving finger motor functions and in releasing muscle spasticity in the whole UE.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectNMES-robot-
dc.subjectStroke rehabilitation-
dc.subjectSupporting strategy-
dc.subjectUpper extremity-
dc.titleDistal versus proximal - An investigation on different supportive strategies by robots for upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: A randomized controlled trial-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12984-019-0537-5-
dc.identifier.pmid31159822-
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC6545723-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85066876974-
dc.identifier.volume16-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spagearticle no. 64-
dc.identifier.epagearticle no. 64-
dc.identifier.eissn1743-0003-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000470177100002-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats