113
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Robotic neurorehabilitation: a computational motor learning perspective

      review-article
      1 , , 1
      Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Conventional neurorehabilitation appears to have little impact on impairment over and above that of spontaneous biological recovery. Robotic neurorehabilitation has the potential for a greater impact on impairment due to easy deployment, its applicability across of a wide range of motor impairment, its high measurement reliability, and the capacity to deliver high dosage and high intensity training protocols.

          We first describe current knowledge of the natural history of arm recovery after stroke and of outcome prediction in individual patients. Rehabilitation strategies and outcome measures for impairment versus function are compared. The topics of dosage, intensity, and time of rehabilitation are then discussed.

          Robots are particularly suitable for both rigorous testing and application of motor learning principles to neurorehabilitation. Computational motor control and learning principles derived from studies in healthy subjects are introduced in the context of robotic neurorehabilitation. Particular attention is paid to the idea of context, task generalization and training schedule. The assumptions that underlie the choice of both movement trajectory programmed into the robot and the degree of active participation required by subjects are examined. We consider rehabilitation as a general learning problem, and examine it from the perspective of theoretical learning frameworks such as supervised and unsupervised learning. We discuss the limitations of current robotic neurorehabilitation paradigms and suggest new research directions from the perspective of computational motor learning.

          Related collections

          Most cited references98

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task.

          We investigated how the CNS learns to control movements in different dynamical conditions, and how this learned behavior is represented. In particular, we considered the task of making reaching movements in the presence of externally imposed forces from a mechanical environment. This environment was a force field produced by a robot manipulandum, and the subjects made reaching movements while holding the end-effector of this manipulandum. Since the force field significantly changed the dynamics of the task, subjects' initial movements in the force field were grossly distorted compared to their movements in free space. However, with practice, hand trajectories in the force field converged to a path very similar to that observed in free space. This indicated that for reaching movements, there was a kinematic plan independent of dynamical conditions. The recovery of performance within the changed mechanical environment is motor adaptation. In order to investigate the mechanism underlying this adaptation, we considered the response to the sudden removal of the field after a training phase. The resulting trajectories, named aftereffects, were approximately mirror images of those that were observed when the subjects were initially exposed to the field. This suggested that the motor controller was gradually composing a model of the force field, a model that the nervous system used to predict and compensate for the forces imposed by the environment. In order to explore the structure of the model, we investigated whether adaptation to a force field, as presented in a small region, led to aftereffects in other regions of the workspace. We found that indeed there were aftereffects in workspace regions where no exposure to the field had taken place; that is, there was transfer beyond the boundary of the training data. This observation rules out the hypothesis that the subject's model of the force field was constructed as a narrow association between visited states and experienced forces; that is, adaptation was not via composition of a look-up table. In contrast, subjects modeled the force field by a combination of computational elements whose output was broadly tuned across the motor state space. These elements formed a model that extrapolated to outside the training region in a coordinate system similar to that of the joints and muscles rather than end-point forces. This geometric property suggests that the elements of the adaptive process represent dynamics of a motor task in terms of the intrinsic coordinate system of the sensors and actuators.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Barthel ADL Index: a reliability study.

            The Barthel Index is a valid measure of disability. In this study we investigated the reliability of four different methods of obtaining the score in 25 patients: self-report, asking a trained nurse who had worked with the patient for at least one shift, and separate testing by two skilled observers within 72 hours of admission. Analysis of total (summed) scores revealed a close correlation between all four methods: a difference of 4/20 points was likely to reflect a genuine difference. In individual items, most disagreement was minor and involved the definition of middle grades. Asking an informed nurse or relative was as reliable as testing, and is quicker.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A computational neuroanatomy for motor control.

              The study of patients to infer normal brain function has a long tradition in neurology and psychology. More recently, the motor system has been subject to quantitative and computational characterization. The purpose of this review is to argue that the lesion approach and theoretical motor control can mutually inform each other. Specifically, one may identify distinct motor control processes from computational models and map them onto specific deficits in patients. Here we review some of the impairments in motor control, motor learning and higher-order motor control in patients with lesions of the corticospinal tract, the cerebellum, parietal cortex, the basal ganglia, and the medial temporal lobe. We attempt to explain some of these impairments in terms of computational ideas such as state estimation, optimization, prediction, cost, and reward. We suggest that a function of the cerebellum is system identification: to build internal models that predict sensory outcome of motor commands and correct motor commands through internal feedback. A function of the parietal cortex is state estimation: to integrate the predicted proprioceptive and visual outcomes with sensory feedback to form a belief about how the commands affected the states of the body and the environment. A function of basal ganglia is related to optimal control: learning costs and rewards associated with sensory states and estimating the "cost-to-go" during execution of a motor task. Finally, functions of the primary and the premotor cortices are related to implementing the optimal control policy by transforming beliefs about proprioceptive and visual states, respectively, into motor commands.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Neuroeng Rehabil
                Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
                BioMed Central
                1743-0003
                2009
                25 February 2009
                : 6
                : 5
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Motor Performance Laboratory, Department of Neurology, The Neurological Institute, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York, USA
                Article
                1743-0003-6-5
                10.1186/1743-0003-6-5
                2653497
                19243614
                3a1c4b1a-3d81-4747-8297-0d7b3edb9622
                Copyright © 2009 Huang and Krakauer; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 13 January 2009
                : 25 February 2009
                Categories
                Review

                Neurosciences
                Neurosciences

                Comments

                Comment on this article