Colombo Roberto, Pisano Fabrizio, Delconte Carmen, Mazzone Alessandra, Grioni Giuseppe, Castagna Marisa, Bazzini Giacomo, Imarisio Chiara, Maggioni Giorgio, Pistarini Caterina
Service of Bioengineering, "Salvatore Maugeri" Foundation, IRCCS, Pavia, Italy -
Service of Bioengineering, "Salvatore Maugeri" Foundation, IRCCS, Veruno, Novara, Italy -
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2017 Apr;53(2):240-248. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.16.04297-0. Epub 2016 Sep 27.
Several robotic devices have been proposed for upper limb rehabilitation, but they differ in terms of application fields and the technical solutions implemented.
The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of three different robotic devices for shoulder-elbow rehabilitation in reducing motor impairment and improving motor performance in post-stroke patients.
Retrospective multi-center study.
Inpatient rehabilitation hospital.
Eighty-seven chronic and subacute post-stroke patients, aged 48-85 years.
Data were obtained through a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent a 3-week rehabilitation program including robot-assisted therapy of the upper limb and conventional physical therapy. Patients were divided into three groups according to the robot device used for exercise training: 'Braccio di Ferro" (BdF), InMotion2 (IMT), and MEchatronic system for MOtor recovery after Stroke (MEMOS). They were evaluated at the beginning and end of treatment using the Fugl-Meyer (FM) and Modified Ashworth (MAS) clinical scales and by a set of robot measured kinematic parameters.
The three groups were homogeneous for age, level of impairment, time since the acute event, and spasticity level. A significant effect of time (P<0.001) was evident on FM and kinematic parameters across all groups. The average change in the FM score was 9.5, 7.3 and 7.1 points, respectively, for BdF, IMT and MEMOS. No significant between-group differences were observed at the MAS pre- vs. post-treatment. A significant interaction between time and groups resulted for the mean velocity (MV, P<0.005) and movement smoothness parameters (nPK, P<0.001 and SM, P<0.02). The effect size (ES) was large for the FM score and MV parameter, independently of the type of robot device used. Further, the ES ranged from moderate to large for the remaining kinematic parameters except for the movement accuracy (mean distance, MD), which exhibited a small ES in the BdF and MEMOS groups.
The motor function gains obtained during robot-assisted therapy of stroke patients seem to be independent of the type of robot device used for the training program. All devices tested in this study were effective in improving the level of impairment and motor performance.
This study could help rehabilitation professionals to set-up comparative studies involving rehabilitation technologies.
已经提出了几种用于上肢康复的机器人设备,但它们在应用领域和所采用的技术解决方案方面存在差异。
本研究的目的是比较三种不同的机器人设备在中风后患者的肩肘康复中减少运动障碍和改善运动表现的有效性。
回顾性多中心研究。
住院康复医院。
87例年龄在48 - 85岁之间的慢性和亚急性中风后患者。
通过对接受为期3周康复计划的患者进行回顾性分析获得数据,该康复计划包括上肢机器人辅助治疗和传统物理治疗。根据用于运动训练的机器人设备将患者分为三组:“铁臂”(BdF)、InMotion2(IMT)和中风后运动恢复机电系统(MEMOS)。在治疗开始和结束时,使用Fugl - Meyer(FM)和改良Ashworth(MAS)临床量表以及一组机器人测量的运动学参数对他们进行评估。
三组在年龄、损伤程度、急性事件后的时间和痉挛程度方面具有同质性。时间对所有组的FM和运动学参数有显著影响(P<0.001)。BdF、IMT和MEMOS组的FM评分平均变化分别为9.5、7.3和7.1分。治疗前与治疗后的MAS评分在组间未观察到显著差异。时间和组之间对于平均速度(MV,P<0.005)和运动平滑度参数(nPK,P<0.001和SM,P<0.02)存在显著交互作用。无论使用何种类型的机器人设备,FM评分和MV参数的效应量(ES)都很大。此外,除了运动准确性(平均距离,MD)外,其余运动学参数的ES范围从中度到较大,MD在BdF和MEMOS组中显示出较小的ES。
中风患者在机器人辅助治疗期间获得的运动功能改善似乎与用于训练计划的机器人设备类型无关。本研究中测试的所有设备在改善损伤程度和运动表现方面都是有效的。
本研究可以帮助康复专业人员开展涉及康复技术的比较研究。