OS3-4 Motion analysis of a wearable lower-limb robotic exoskeleton in assisting sit-tostand maneuver in individuals with spinal cord injuries(OS3: Rehabilitation Devices I)

Author(s):  
Tung-Wu Lu ◽  
Ting-Ming Wang ◽  
Ming-I Lin ◽  
Hsing-Po Huang ◽  
Hui-Fen Mao ◽  
...  
Angiology ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfried Germing ◽  
Mahmud Schakrouf ◽  
Michael Lindstaedt ◽  
Peter Grewe ◽  
Renate Meindl ◽  
...  

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 1003
Author(s):  
Sung-Hyeon Kim ◽  
Ho-Jin Shin ◽  
Hwi-Young Cho

A variety of robotic exoskeletons have been developed for patients with spinal cord injuries. However, the optimal training method and period for using a robotic exoskeleton have been uncertain until now. The purpose of this study is to determine the minimum training period for using a robotic exoskeleton with minimal muscle activity by investigating the changes in muscle activity and muscle characteristics of healthy adults during robotic exoskeleton training. A total of 16 people participated in the study. The robotic exoskeleton locomotion training consisted of three 50-min sessions a week for 7 weeks. The assessment consisted of sitting, standing, wide standing, sit-to-stand, and stand-to-sit where muscle activity and muscle characteristics were measured during each motion. All measurements were performed in the first session and every five sessions. Participants showed decreased muscle activity up to 10 sessions of training in the standing position, and 15 sessions in sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit motions. Upper extremity muscles showed decreased muscle activity, tone, stiffness, and logarithmic decrement up to the 15th session. The study results show that at least 15 training sessions are required to use the robotic exoskeleton with minimal load on the musculoskeletal system, and longer training is required for patients with spinal cord injury.


Author(s):  
Nicola Postol ◽  
Neil J. Spratt ◽  
Andrew Bivard ◽  
Jodie Marquez

Abstract Background Evidence is emerging for the use of overground lower limb robotic exoskeletons in the rehabilitation of people with spinal cord injury (SCI), with suggested benefits for gait speed, bladder and bowel function, pain management and spasticity. To date, research has focused on devices that require the user to support themselves with a walking aid. This often precludes use by those with severe trunk, postural or upper limb deficits and places the user in a suboptimal, flexed standing position. Free-standing exoskeletons enable people with higher level injuries to exercise in an upright position. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of therapy with a free-standing exoskeleton for those with SCI, and to determine the potential health-related benefits of this intervention. Methods This 12-week intervention study with 12-week waitlist control and 12-week follow up, provided people with SCI scoring < 5 on the mobility section of the spinal cord independence measure (SCIM-III) twice weekly therapy in the REX (Rex Bionics, Auckland, NZ), a free-standing lower limb robotic exoskeleton. The primary outcome measure of interest was function, as measured on the SCIM-III. A battery of secondary outcomes was included. Participants also completed a survey on their perceptions of this treatment modality, to determine acceptability. Results Forty-one potential participants were screened for eligibility. Two females (one ASIA A, one ASIA C) and one male (ASIA B) completed all 24 intervention sessions, and the follow up assessment. One participant showed positive trends in function, fatigue, quality of life and mood during the intervention phase. Grip and quadriceps strength, and lower limb motor function improved in another. Two improved their percentage of lean body mass during the intervention phase. Remaining results were varied across patients, time points and outcomes. The intervention was highly acceptable to all participants. Conclusion With three of 41 potential participants being eligible and completing this study, our results show that there are potential benefits of exercise in a free-standing exoskeleton for people with severe mobility impairment due to SCI, for a small subset of patients. Further research is warranted to determine those most likely to benefit, and the type of benefit depending on the patient characteristics. Trial registration The trial was registered prospectively on 20 April 2018 at www.anzctr.org.au/ (ACTRN12618000626268)


2020 ◽  
Vol 90 (9) ◽  
pp. 1743-1749
Author(s):  
Denis P. Koong ◽  
Michael J. Symes ◽  
Andrew K. Sefton ◽  
Brahman S. Sivakumar ◽  
Andrew Ellis

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Richard T. Katz

Abstract This article addresses some criticisms of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) by comparing previously published outcome data from a group of complete spinal cord injury (SCI) persons with impairment ratings for a corresponding level of injury calculated using the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition. Results of the comparison show that impairment ratings using the sixth edition scale poorly with the level of impairments of activities of daily living (ADL) in SCI patients as assessed by the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) motor scale and the extended FIM motor scale. Because of the combinations of multiple impairments, the AMA Guides potentially overrates the impairment of paraplegics compared with that of quadriplegics. The use and applicability of the Combined Values formula should be further investigated, and complete loss of function of two upper extremities seems consistent with levels of quadriplegia using the SCI model. Some aspects of the AMA Guides contain inconsistencies. The concept of diminishing impairment values is not easily translated between specific losses of function per organ system and “overall” loss of ADLs involving multiple organ systems, and the notion of “catastrophic thresholds” involving multiple organ systems may support the understanding that variations in rating may exist in higher rating cases such as those that involve an SCI.


2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Robert H. Haralson

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, was published in November 2000 and contains major changes from its predecessor. In the Fourth Edition, all musculoskeletal evaluation and rating was described in a single chapter. In the Fifth Edition, this information has been divided into three separate chapters: Upper Extremity (13), Lower Extremity (14), and Spine (15). This article discusses changes in the spine chapter. The Models for rating spinal impairment now are called Methods. The AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, has reverted to standard terminology for spinal regions in the Diagnosis-related estimates (DRE) Method, and both it and the Range of Motion (ROM) Method now reference cervical, thoracic, and lumbar. Also, the language requiring the use of the DRE, rather than the ROM Method has been strengthened. The biggest change in the DRE Method is that evaluation should include the treatment results. Unfortunately, the Fourth Edition's philosophy regarding when and how to rate impairment using the DRE Model led to a number of problems, including the same rating of all patients with radiculopathy despite some true differences in outcomes. The term differentiator was abandoned and replaced with clinical findings. Significant changes were made in evaluation of patients with spinal cord injuries, and evaluators should become familiar with these and other changes in the Fifth Edition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document