Compensation or Restoration: Closed-Loop Feedback of Movement Quality for Assisted Reach-to-Grasp Exercises with a Multi-Joint Arm Exoskeleton

The aim of the study was to present a systematic review of studies that investigate the effects of robot-assisted therapy on motor and functional recovery in patients with stroke. A database of articles published up to October 2006 was compiled using the following Medline key words: cerebral vascular accident, cerebral vascular disorders, stroke, paresis, hemiplegia, upper extremity, arm, and robot. References listed in relevant publications were also screened. Studies that satisfied the following selection criteria were included: (1) patients were diagnosed with cerebral vascular accident; (2) effects of robot-assisted therapy for the upper limb were investigated; (3) the outcome was measured in terms of motor and/or functional recovery of the upper paretic limb; and (4) the study was a randomized clinical trial (RCT). For each outcome measure, the estimated effect size (ES) and the summary effect size (SES) expressed in standard deviation units (SDU) were calculated for motor recovery and functional ability (activities of daily living [ADLs]) using fixed and random effect models. Ten studies, involving 218 patients, were included in the synthesis. Their methodological quality ranged from 4 to 8 on a (maximum) 10-point scale. Meta-analysis showed a nonsignificant heterogeneous SES in terms of upper limb motor recovery. Sensitivity analysis of studies involving only shoulder-elbow robotics subsequently demonstrated a significant homogeneous SES for motor recovery of the upper paretic limb. No significant SES was observed for functional ability (ADL). As a result of marked heterogeneity in studies between distal and proximal arm robotics, no overall significant effect in favor of robot-assisted therapy was found in the present meta-analysis. However, subsequent sensitivity analysis showed a significant improvement in upper limb motor function after stroke for upper arm robotics. No significant improvement was found in ADL function. However, the administered ADL scales in the reviewed studies fail to adequately reflect recovery of the paretic upper limb, whereas valid instruments that measure outcome of dexterity of the paretic arm and hand are mostly absent in selected studies. Future research into the effects of robot-assisted therapy should therefore distinguish between upper and lower robotics arm training and concentrate on kinematical analysis to differentiate between genuine upper limb motor recovery and functional recovery due to compensation strategies by proximal control of the trunk and upper limb.

A major prerequisite for successful rehabilitation therapy after stroke is the understanding of the mechanisms underlying motor deficits common to these patients. Studies have shown that in stroke patients multijoint pointing movements are characterized by decreased movement speed and increased movement variability, by increased movement segmentation and by spatial and temporal incoordination between adjacent arm joints with respect to healthy subjects. We studied how the damaged nervous system recovers or compensates for deficits in reaching, and correlated reaching deficits with the level of functional impairment. Nine right-hemiparetic subjects and nine healthy subjects participated. All subjects were right-hand dominant. Data from the affected arm of hemiparetic subjects were compared with those from the arm in healthy subjects. Seated subjects made 40 pointing movements with the right arm in a single session. Movements were made from an initial target, for which the arm was positioned alongside the trunk. Then the subject lifted the arm and pointed to the final target, located in front of the subject in the contralateral workspace. Kinematic data from the arm and trunk were recorded with a three-dimensional analysis system. Arm movements in stroke subjects were longer, more segmented, more variable and had larger movement errors. Elbow-shoulder coordination was disrupted and the range of active joint motion was decreased significantly compared with healthy subjects. Some aspects of motor performance (duration, segmentation, accuracy and coordination) were significantly correlated with the level of motor impairment. Despite the fact that stroke subjects encountered all these deficits, even subjects with the most severe motor impairment were able to transport the end-point to the target. All but one subject involved the trunk to accomplish this motor task. In others words, they recruited new degrees of freedom typically not used by healthy subjects. The use of compensatory strategies may be related to the degree of motor impairment: severely to moderately impaired subjects recruited new degrees of freedom to compensate for motor deficits while mildly impaired subjects tended to employ healthy movement patterns. We discuss the possibility that there is a critical level of recovery at which patients switch from a strategy employing new degrees of freedom to one in which motor recovery is produced by improving the management of degrees of freedom characteristic of healthy performance. Our data also suggest that stroke subjects may be able to exploit effectively the redundancy of the motor system.

The authors previously developed a passive instrumented arm orthosis (Therapy Wilmington Robotic Exoskeleton [T-WREX]) that enables individuals with hemiparesis to exercise the arm by playing computer games in a gravity-supported environment. The purpose of this study was to compare semiautonomous training with T-WREX and conventional semiautonomous exercises that used a tabletop for gravity support. Twenty-eight chronic stroke survivors with moderate/severe hemiparesis were randomly assigned to experimental (T-WREX) or control (tabletop exercise) treatment. A blinded rater assessed arm movement before and after twenty-four 1-hour treatment sessions and at 6-month follow-up. Subjects also rated subjective treatment preferences after a single-session crossover treatment. All subjects significantly improved ( P < or = .05) upper extremity motor control (Fugl-Meyer), active reaching range of motion (ROM), and self-reported quality and amount of arm use (Motor Activity Log). Improvements were sustained at 6 months. The T-WREX group maintained gains on the Fugl-Meyer significantly better than controls at 6 months (improvement of 3.6 +/- 3.9 vs 1.5 +/- 2.7 points, mean +/- SD; P = .04). Subjects also reported a preference for T-WREX training. Gravity-supported arm exercise, using the T-WREX or tabletop support, can improve arm movement ability after chronic severe hemiparesis with brief one-on-one assistance from a therapist (approximately 4 minutes per session). The 3-dimensional weight support, instant visual movement feedback, and simple virtual reality software provided by T-WREX were associated with modest sustained gains at 6-month follow-up when compared with the conventional approach.