World Scientific
Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×
Our website is made possible by displaying certain online content using javascript.
In order to view the full content, please disable your ad blocker or whitelist our website www.worldscientific.com.

System Upgrade on Mon, Jun 21st, 2021 at 1am (EDT)

During this period, the E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 6 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at [email protected] for any enquiries.
Special Issue: A Special Selection on Biological Mechanics; Guest Editors: F. Liu and E. Y. K. NgNo Access

A NOVEL MULTI-DOF EXOSKELETON ROBOT FOR UPPER LIMB REHABILITATION

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219519416400236Cited by:8
    Previous
    Next

    Abstract

    Patients who suffer from stroke have motion function disorders. They need rehabilitation training guided by doctors and trainers. Nowadays, robots have been introduced to help the patients regain their motion function in rehabilitation training. In this paper, a novel multi degree of freedom (DOF) exoskeleton robot, with light weight, including (6+1) DOFs, named as Rehab-Arm, is proposed and developed for upper limb rehabilitation. The joints of the robot are equipped with micro motors which are capable of actuating each DOF respectively and simultaneously. The medial/lateral rotation of shoulder is realized by a semi-circle guide mechanism for convenience consideration and safety. The robot is used in sitting posture which is attached to a custom made chair. Hence, the robot can be used to assist patients in passive movement with 7 DOFs of the upper limb for rehabilitation. Five adult healthy male subjects participated in the experiment to test the joint movement accuracy of the robot. Finally, subjects can wear Rehab-Arm and move their upper limb, led by micro motors of the robot, to perform task assigned with specific trajectory.

    References

    • 1. Diez-Tejedor E, Fuentes B, Acute care in stroke: The importance of early intervention to achieve better brain protection, Cerebrovascular Diseases 17(Suppl 1) :130–137, 2003. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 2. Hayes SH, Carroll SR, Early intervention care in the acute stroke patient, Arch Phys Medi Rehabil 67 (5) :319–321, 1986. ISI, Google Scholar
    • 3. Feys HM et al., Effect of a therapeutic intervention for the hemiplegic upper limb in the acute phase after stroke a single-blind, randomized, controlled multicenter trial, Stroke 29 (4) :785–792, 1998. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 4. Barreca S et al., Treatment interventions for the paretic upper limb of stroke survivors: A critical review, Neurorehabil Neural Repair 17 (4) :220–226, 2003. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 5. Kwakkel G et al., Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: A randomised trial, The Lancet 354 (9174) :191–196, 1999. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 6. van der Lee JH et al., Exercise therapy for arm function in stroke patients: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials, Clini Rehabil 15 (1) :20–31, 2001. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 7. Hesse S et al., Computerized arm training improves the motor control of the severely affected arm after stroke a single-blinded randomized trial in two centers, Stroke 36 (9) :1960–1966, 2005. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 8. Kwakkel G, Impact of intensity of practice after stroke: Issues for consideration, Disab Rehabil 28 (13–14) :823–830, 2006. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 9. Nelles G et al., Arm training induced brain plasticity in stroke studied with serial positron emission tomography, Neuroimage 13 (6) :1146–1154, 2001. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 10. Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Wagenaar R, Long term effects of intensity of upper and lower limb training after stroke: A randomised trial, J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 72 (4) :473–479, 2002. ISI, Google Scholar
    • 11. Bütefisch C et al., Repetitive training of isolated movements improves the outcome of motor rehabilitation of the centrally paretic hand, J Neurol Sci 130 (1) :59–68, 1995. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 12. Lum S, Reinkensmeyer DJ, Lehman SL, Robotic assist devices for bimanual physical therapy: Preliminary experiments. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 1 (3) :185–191, 1993. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 13. Reinkensmeyer D, Lehman S, Lum P, A bimanual therapy robot: Controller design and prototype experiments, Proc 15th Annual Int Conf IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 1993, IEEE, 1993. Google Scholar
    • 14. Lum PS et al., MIME robotic device for upper-limb neurorehabilitation in subacute stroke subjects: A follow-up study, J Rehabil Res Dev 43 (5) :631, 2006. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 15. Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, Evidence for improved muscle activation patterns after retraining of reaching movements with the MIME robotic system in subjects with post-stroke hemiparesis, IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 12 (2) :186–194, 2004. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 16. Reinkensmeyer DJ, Dewald JP, Rymer WZ, Guidance-based quantification of arm impairment following brain injury: A pilot study, IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 7 (1) :1–11, 1999. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 17. Reinkensmeyer DJ et al., Understanding and treating arm movement impairment after chronic brain injury: Progress with the ARM guide, J Rehabil Res Dev 37 (6): 653–662, 2000. ISI, Google Scholar
    • 18. Krebs HI, Hogan N, Therapeutic robotics: A technology push, Proc IEEE 94 (9) :1727–1738, 2006. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 19. Amirabdollahian F, Loureiro R, Harwin W, Minimum jerk trajectory control for rehabilitation and haptic applications, Proc ICRA 02 IEEE Int Conf Robotics and Automation, 2002, IEEE, 2002. Google Scholar
    • 20. Coote S et al., The effect of the GENTLE/s robot-mediated therapy system on arm function after stroke, Clin Rehabil 22 (5) :395–405, 2008. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 21. Holt R et al., User involvement in developing rehabilitation robotic devices: An essential requirement, IEEE 10th Inter Conf Rehabilitation Robotics, 2007. ICORR 2007, IEEE, 2007. Google Scholar
    • 22. Ball SJ, Brown IE, Scott SH, MEDARM: A rehabilitation robot with 5DOF at the shoulder complex, 2007 IEEE/ASME Inter Conf Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, IEEE, 2007. Google Scholar
    • 23. Gupta A, O’Malley MK, Design of a haptic arm exoskeleton for training and rehabilitation, IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatronics 11 (3) :280–289, 2006. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 24. Stienen AHA et al., Dampace: Design of an exoskeleton for force-coordination training in upper-extremity rehabilitation, J Med Dev 3 (3) :031003, 2009. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 25. Retolaza I et al., Design of a five actuated DoF upper limb exoskeleton oriented to workplace help, 2nd IEEE RAS & EMBS Int Conf Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics, 2008. BioRob 2008, IEEE, 2008. Google Scholar
    • 26. Nef T, Mihelj M, Riener R, ARMin: A robot for patient-cooperative arm therapy, Med Biol Eng Comput 45 (9) :887–900, 2007. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 27. Silawatchananai C, Parnichkun M, Force control of an upper limb exoskeleton for virtual reality using impedance control, 2011 IEEE Int Conf Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), 2011. Google Scholar
    • 28. Wu Q, X Wang, F Du, Development and analysis of a gravity-balanced exoskeleton for active rehabilitation training of upper limb, Mech Eng Sci 203–210 :1989–1996, 2015. Google Scholar
    • 29. Gunasekara M, Gopura R, Jayawardena S, 6-REXOS: Upper limb exoskeleton robot with improved pHRI, Int J Adv Robotic Syst 12 :1–13, 2015. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • 30. Otten A et al., LIMPACT: A hydraulically powered self-aligning upper limb exoskeleton, IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatronics 20 (5) :2285–2298, 2015. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    Published: 6 October 2016