Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Universidade de Lisb...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
addClaim

Upper limb robotic rehabilitation in chronic stroke

Authors: Fernandes, Tiago Miguel Ferreira;

Upper limb robotic rehabilitation in chronic stroke

Abstract

Introdução: acidente vascular cerebral (AVC) é a segunda maior causa de anos de vida ajustados por incapacidade (DALYs). Mesmo após fisioterapia e terapia ocupacional, os défices motores persistem em 55-75% das pessoas, seis meses após AVC (crónico). Nas últimas décadas, com o desenvolvimento tecnológico da nossa sociedade, novos robots foram desenvolvidos para a reabilitação motora. Objetivo: desenvolver uma revisão sistemática que compara o impacto da terapia robótica (TR) contra a terapia convencional (TC), na função motora do membro superior em pessoas com AVC crónico. Métodos: recolhemos 17 ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECT) que aplicavam a TR com recurso a diferentes robots (Bi-Manu-Track, InMotion, ARMin III, UL-EX07, Haptic Master e Amadeo). Calculamos o impacto de cada robot na função motora do membro superior e comparamos a terapia robótica à terapia convencional, baseado no Fugl-Meyer Assessment – Upper Limb (FMA-UL). Resultados: 17 ECT, envolvendo 620 pessoas, foram incluídos na revisão. Os robots mais utilizados foram o Bi-Manu-Track (BMT) e InMotion (IMT). Após a intervenção de TR, ocorreu uma diferença média de 2.66 e 2.42 no FMA-UL, para o BMT e IMT, respetivamente. Apesar do Amadeo ter apenas sido utilizado num estudo, foi o que apresentou melhores resultados quando comparado com TC. Comparando a TR com TC, não houve uma diferença significativa no aumento médio do FMA-UL. No entanto, o Risk Ratio foi de 1.65, mostrando uma tendência para a TR. Conclusão: foi possível determinar que com a adição de terapia robótica ao programa de reabilitação, é possível alcançar ganhos razoáveis na função motora do membro superior de pessoas com AVC crónico, comparáveis aos obtidos com terapia convencional. Então, abre-se a possibilidade de tratar um maior número de pessoas, visto que estes robots não são dependentes do terapeuta. Para além disso, propomos várias ideias a serem implementadas em estudos futuros.

Introduction: stroke is the second leading cause of disability-adjusted life years, with physiotherapy and occupational therapy being the standard of care for recovery of post-stroke motor function. Despite rehabilitation programs, motor impairments persist in 55-75% of chronic patients (time-since-stroke > 6 months). In the last decades, with the technological development of our society, new robot-based therapy approaches have been created. Objective: to develop a systematic review comparing robot-based therapy (RBT) to conventional therapy (CT), regarding its impact on upper limb motor function from chronic stroke patients. Methods: we gathered 17 randomized clinical trials (RCT) from different RBT with the application of several robot devices (Bi-Manu-Track, InMotion, ARMin III, UL-EX07, Haptic Master and Amadeo). We calculated each robot’s impact on upper limb motor function and compared overall RBT to CT, based on our main outcome, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment - Upper Limb (FMA-UL). Results: we included in the review 17 RCT, involving 620 patients. The most used robots were Bi-Manu-Track (BMT) and InMotion (IMT). After RBT intervention, there was a mean difference of 2.66 and 2.42 in FMA-UL, for BMT and IMT, respectively. Despite Amadeo only appearing in one study, it was the one with the highest increase in FMA-UL, when compared to CT. Comparing RBT to CT, we could not find a significant difference in the increase of FMA-UL. However, the Risk Ratio was 1.65, showing a tendency towards RBT. Conclusion: it was possible to determine that adding robot-based therapy to the rehabilitation of the upper limb in chronic stroke patients accomplishes reasonable gains in motor function, comparable to conventional therapy alone. This opens the possibility to treat a bigger number of patients, since the robots are not therapist dependent. We also propose several ideas to be implemented in future studies.

Trabalho Final do Curso de Mestrado Integrado em Medicina, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, 2021

Country
Portugal
Related Organizations
Keywords

Acidente vascular cerebral, Domínio/Área Científica::Ciências Médicas, Robot, Reabilitação motora, Inteligência artificial

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green