skip to main content
10.1145/3529261.3529274acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesrobceConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Effects of upper limb robot-assisted rehabilitation on motor function recovery and neuromuscular electrophysiological changes of stroke patients

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 April 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

[Objective] To evaluate the effect of bilateral upper limb robot-assisted rehabilitation on upper extremity motor function recovery and neuromuscular electrophysiological changes in stroke patients, compared to the routine therapy. [Methods] Forty stroke patients were enrolled and randomized into two groups, both exposed to standard therapy, in comparison with the conventional therapy (CT) group provided with routine therapy, the robot-assist therapy(RAT) group received additional robot-assisted therapy distributed in sessions,30 min per day,6 days a week, for 3 weeks. To evaluate motor function and neuromuscular electrophysiological changes, the following evaluations were performed: simplified upper limb Fugl-meyer(FMA-UE),surface electromyography measurements recorded from biceps brachii(BB),triceps brachii(TB),anterior deltoid bundle(ADB),and middle deltoid bundle(MDB),and motor evoked potentials(MEPs) [Results] (1) Comparison of FMA-UE: evidence of improvements in FMA-UE was found in both RAT and CT (P<0.05),with a significantly higher improvement in the RAT(P<0.05).(2)Comparison of surface electromyography measurements: root mean square (RMS) and integral electromyography(iEMG) of BB, TB, ADB and MDB on the affected side of the two groups were higher than those before treatment (P<0.05),with a remarkabiy higher levels in the RAT(P<0.05); (3) Comparison of MEP: After treatment, the motor evoked potential elicitation rates in the RAT and the CT increased from 5/20 (25%) and 6/20 (30%) before treatment to 12/20 (60%) and 7/20 (35%),Significantly improved compared with before treatment (X2=5.625, P=0.018).[Conclusion]The bilateral upper limb robot-assisted rehabilitation training can effectively improve the muscle strength by promoting the functional remodeling of the corticospinal tract and enhancing the muscle excitation recruitment, and improve the motor function of the upper limbs after stroke.

References

  1. Rodgers H, Bosomworth H, Krebs HI, Robot assisted training for the upper limb after stroke (RATULS): a multicentre randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet. 2019 Jul 6;394(10192):51-62.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Dehem S, Gilliaux M, Stoquart G, Effectiveness of upper-limb robotic-assisted therapy in the early rehabilitation phase after stroke: A single-blind, randomised, controlled trial[J]. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2019 Sep;62(5):313-320.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Yang Ziyi,Guo Shuxiang,Hirata Hideyuki A Mirror Bilateral Neuro-Rehabilitation Robot System with the sEMG-Based Real-Time Patient Active Participant Assessment.[J] .Life (Basel), 2021, 11: undefined.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Zhu G, Zhang X, Tang X, Examining and monitoring paretic muscle changes during stroke rehabilitation using surface electromyography: A pilot study[J]. Math Biosci Eng. 2019 Sep 30;17(1):216-234.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Du J, Yang F, Hu J,et al. Effects of high- and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor recovery in early stroke patients: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial with clinical, neurophysiological and functional imaging assessments[J]. Neuroimage Clin. 2019;21:101620.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Neurology Branch of Chinese Medical Association, Cerebrovascular Disease Group of Neurology Branch of Chinese Medical Association. Key points of diagnosis of various major cerebrovascular diseases in China 2019[J].Chinese Journal of Neurology,2019,52(9):710-715.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review[J]. Lancet Neurol, 8: 741–754.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. kiper P, Szczudlik A, Agostini M,et al. Virtual Reality for Upper Limb Rehabilitation in Subacute and Chronic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial[J]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 May;99(5):834-842.e4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Budhota A, Chua KSG, Hussain A, Robotic Assisted Upper Limb Training Post Stroke: A Randomized Control Trial Using Combinatory Approach Toward Reducing Workforce Demands[J]. Front Neurol. 2021;12:622014. Published 2021 Jun 2.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Lotze Martin,Ladda Aija Marie,Stephan Klaus Martin,Cerebral plasticity as the basis for upper limb recovery following brain damage[J] .Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2019, 99: 49-58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. calabrò RS, Naro A, Russo M, Shaping neuroplasticity by using powered exoskeletons in patients with stroke: a randomized clinical trial[J].J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018 Apr 25;15(1):35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. cho SR, Suh H, Yu JH, Astroglial Activation by an Enriched Environment after Transplantation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells Enhances Angiogenesis after Hypoxic-Ischemic Brain Injury[J]. Int J Mol Sci. 2016 Sep 14;17(9):1550.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Lencioni T, Fornia L, Bowman T, A randomized controlled trial on the effects induced by robot-assisted and usual-care rehabilitation on upper limb muscle synergies in post-stroke subjects[J].Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):5323. Published 2021 Mar 5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Iwamoto Y, Imura T, Suzukawa T,et al. Combination of Exoskeletal Upper Limb Robot and Occupational Therapy Improve Activities of Daily Living Function in Acute Stroke Patients[J]. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2019 Jul;28(7):2018-2025.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Zhu Lin, Xi Yanling, Huang Haixia, Curative effect observation and surface electromyogram analysis of robot-assisted training on upper limb flexor spasm in stroke patients [J]. China Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 2020, 35(8): 954-958.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hung Chung-Shan,Lin Keh-Chung,Chang Wan-Ying Unilateral vs Bilateral Hybrid Approaches for Upper Limb Rehabilitation in Chronic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial.[J] .Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2019, 100: 2225-2232.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Bakker C D,Massa M,Daffertshofer A The addition of the MEP amplitude of finger extension muscles to clinical predictors of hand function after stroke: A prospective cohort study.[J] .Restor Neurol Neurosci, 2019, 37: 445-456.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Che Xudong, Peng Xing. Predictive value of motor evoked potentials for upper limb motor function rehabilitation in acute and subacute stages of stroke[J].Modern Medicine and Health, 2021,37(22):3819-3822+3827.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Miller KJ, Gallina A, Neva JL,et al. Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with robot-assisted training on wrist muscle activation post-stroke[J]. Clin Neurophysiol. 2019 Aug;130(8):1271-1279.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. shahar Neta,Schwartz Isabella,Portnoy Sigal,Differences in muscle activity and fatigue of the upper limb between Task-Specific training and robot assisted training among individuals post stroke[J].J Biomech, 2019, 89: 28-33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. simkins M, Kim H, Abrams G, Robotic unilateral and bilateral upper-limb movement training for stroke survivors afflicted by chronic hemiparesis[J]. IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot. 2013 Jun; 2013:6650506.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Qu Q, Lin Y, He Z, The Effect of Applying Robot-Assisted Task-Oriented Training Using Human-Robot Collaborative Interaction Force Control Technology on Upper Limb Function in Stroke Patients: Preliminary Findings[J]. Biomed Res Int. 2021; 2021:9916492. Published 2021 Jul 28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    RobCE '22: Proceedings of the 2022 2nd International Conference on Robotics and Control Engineering
    March 2022
    107 pages
    ISBN:9781450395854
    DOI:10.1145/3529261

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 25 April 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format