Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

SAM, an Assistive Robotic Device Dedicated to Helping Persons with Quadriplegia: Usability Study

  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this case study was to evaluate the technology readiness level of a prototype named “SAM” that consists of a robotic arm mounted on a mobile base. Usability and acceptance assessments were performed in patients with high-level quadriplegia. Seventeen patients with quadriplegia were trained to pick up three different objects in three different situations amounting to scenarios 1, 2 and 3. Each scenario was observed over the 5 steps of its execution. For each step, usability and acceptability parameters were measured. The success rate was optimal or acceptable (70–100%) for (step 1) identifying the room where the object was located, (step 2) directing SAM towards the object and (step 5) monitoring the return of SAM and dropping the object. Designating and validating the object (step 3), approaching and grasping the object (step 4) were rarely completed without any mistake. A majority of patients (70.6%) saw the usage of SAM as an interesting perspective for daily tasks (58.8%) as well as in the potential reorganising of the caregivers’ time (47%). This study suggests that the usage of SAM allows patients with quadriplegia to grab objects both within and out of their field of view. Possibilities allowing the act of seizure are increased via a user-friendly interface which is yet to be improved. Its technology readiness level has been estimated 5.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ADL:

Activities of daily living

ARMEN:

Assistive robotics to maintain individuals in their natural environment

HMI:

Human machine interface

PM&R:

Physical medicine and rehabilitation

TRL:

Technology readiness level

References

  1. United Nations (2015) World population prospects: the 2015 revision, key findings and advance tables. United Nations, New York

  2. Jackson AB, Dijkers M, Devivo MJ, Poczatek RB (2004) A demographic profile of new traumatic spinal cord injuries: change and stability over 30 years. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 85:1740–1748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fragonard B (2011) Stratégie pour la couverture de la dépendance des personnes âgées. Ministère des Solidarités et de la Cohésion Sociale, Paris

  4. Bien ZZ, Lee H-E, Do J-H et al (2008) Intelligent interaction for human-friendly service robot in smart house environment. Int J Comput Intell Syst 1:77–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/18756891.2008.9727606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tsui KM, Feil-Seifer DJ, Matarić MJ, Yanco HA (2009) Performance evaluation methods for assistive robotic technology. In: Madhavan R, Tunstel E, Messina E (eds) Performance evaluation and benchmarking of intelligent systems. Springer, US, Boston, MA, pp 41–66

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Simpson LA, Eng JJ, Hsieh JTC et al (2012) The health and life priorities of individuals with spinal cord injury: a systematic review. J Neurotrauma 29:1548–1555. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2011.2226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Balaguer C, Gimenez A, Jardon A, et al (2005) Live experimentation of the service robot applications for elderly people care in home environments. In: 2005 IEEERSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 2345–2350

  8. Bai J, Song A, Xu B et al (2017) A novel human–robot cooperative method for upper extremity rehabilitation. Int J Soc Robot 9:265–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0393-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brose SW, Weber DJ, Salatin BA et al (2010) The role of assistive robotics in the lives of persons with disability. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 89:509–521. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181cf569b

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Maheu V, Frappier J, Archambault PS, Routhier F (2011) Evaluation of the JACO robotic arm: clinico-economic study for powered wheelchair users with upper-extremity disabilities. In: IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot Proc 2011, p 5975397. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICORR.2011.5975397

  11. Pazzaglia M, Molinari M (2016) The embodiment of assistive devices-from wheelchair to exoskeleton. Phys Life Rev 16:163–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2015.11.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Song A, Wu C, Ni D et al (2016) One-therapist to three-patient telerehabilitation robot system for the upper limb after stroke. Int J Soc Robot 8:319–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0343-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chang PH, Park H-S (2003) Development of a robotic arm for handicapped people: a task-oriented design approach. Auton Robots 15:81–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024449018826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Coignard P, Departe JP, Remy Neris O et al (2013) ANSO study: evaluation in an indoor environment of a mobile assistance robotic grasping arm. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 56:621–633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Allen JR, Karchak A, Bontrager EL (1972) Final project report: design and fabricate a pair of rancho anthropomorphic manipulator. Rancho Los Amigos Hospital, Downey

  16. Guittet J, Kwee H, Quetin N, Yclon J (1979) The Spartacus telethesis: manipulator control studies. Bull Prosth Res 10–13:69–105

    Google Scholar 

  17. Busnel M, Cammoun R, Coulon-Lauture F et al (1999) The robotized workstation “MASTER” for users with tetraplegia: description and evaluation. J Rehabil Res Dev 36:217–229

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wagner JJ, Van der Loos HF (2004) Training strategies for the user interface of vocational assistive robots. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 7:5423–5425. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2004.1404515

    Google Scholar 

  19. Topping M (2002) An overview of the development of Handy 1, a rehabilitation robot to assist the severely disabled. J Intell Robot Syst 34:253–263. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016355418817

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Driessen BJ, Evers HG, van Woerden JA (2001) MANUS-a wheelchair-mounted rehabilitation robot. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 215:285–290. https://doi.org/10.1243/0954411011535876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dune C, Leroux C, Marchand E (2007) Intuitive human interaction with an arm robot for severely handicapped people—a one click approach—IEEE Xplore Document

  22. Mahoney R (2001) The Raptor wheelchair robot system. In: Integration of Assistive Technology in the Information Age ICORR 2001, pp 135–141

  23. Graf B, Hans M, Schraft RD (2004) Care-O-bot II—development of a next generation robotic home assistant. Auton Robots 16:193–205. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AURO.0000016865.35796.e9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bedaf S, Marti P, Amirabdollahian F, de Witte L (2017) A multi-perspective evaluation of a service robot for seniors: the voice of different stakeholders. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2017.1358300

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lebec O, Ben Ghezala MW, Leynart V et al (2013) High level functions for the intuitive use of an assistive robot. In: IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot Proc 2013, p 6650374. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICORR.2013.6650374

  26. Dario P, Guglielmelli E, Genovese V, Toro M (1996) Robot assistants: applications and evolution. Robot Auton Syst 18:225–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Translation Benedicte Clement and Noor Riazul. Prototype development Partners: CEA List, LASMEA, CNRS-LIMSI, VOXLER, ROBOSOFT and APPROCHE.

Funding

This study was funded by the French National Research Agency (TecSan Project Technologies for health and autonomy).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CRF COS Divio, 21000, Dijon, France

    Charles Fattal

  2. APPROCHE, 56275, Ploemeur, France

    Charles Fattal

  3. APPROCHE, 34090, Montpellier, France

    Violaine Leynaert

  4. CHU Lapeyronie Service MPR, 34090, Montpellier, France

    Isabelle Laffont

  5. CENTRE Jacques Calvé, 62608, Berck-sur-Mer, France

    Axelle Baillet

  6. USSAP, Centre Bouffard-Vercelli, 66000, Cerbère, France

    Michel Enjalbert

  7. Interactive Robotics Lab, CEA LIST DIASI, 92191, Gif Sur Yvette, France

    Christophe Leroux

  8. CRF La Châtaigneraie, Rue Bernard Astruc, 95180, Menucourt, France

    Charles Fattal

Authors
  1. Charles Fattal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Violaine Leynaert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Isabelle Laffont
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Axelle Baillet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michel Enjalbert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christophe Leroux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles Fattal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee on April 9th, 2013 (ref # 13 03 04).

Informed Consent

All study participants provided written informed consent prior to enrollment.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fattal, C., Leynaert, V., Laffont, I. et al. SAM, an Assistive Robotic Device Dedicated to Helping Persons with Quadriplegia: Usability Study. Int J of Soc Robotics 11, 89–103 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-018-0482-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-018-0482-7

Keywords