Influences of the biofeedback content on robotic post-stroke gait rehabilitation: electromyographic vs joint torque biofeedback

被引:43
作者
Tamburella, Federica [1 ,2 ]
Moreno, Juan C. [3 ]
Herrera Valenzuela, Diana Sofia [4 ]
Pisotta, Iolanda [2 ]
Iosa, Marco [5 ]
Cincotti, Febo [6 ,7 ]
Mattia, Donatella [7 ]
Pons, Jose L. [3 ,8 ,9 ,10 ]
Molinari, Marco [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Santa Lucia Fdn IRCCS, Spinal Rehabil Lab, Neurol & Spinal Cord Injury Rehabil Dept A, Via Ardeatina 306, I-00179 Rome, Italy
[2] Santa Lucia Fdn IRCCS, Lab Robot Appl Neurol Rehabil, NeuroRobot, Neurol & Spinal Cord Injury Rehabil Dept A, Via Ardeatina 306, I-00179 Rome, Italy
[3] Spanish Natl Res Council, Cajal Inst, Neural Rehabil Grp, Av Doctor Arce 37, Madrid 28002, Spain
[4] Univ Los Andes, Dept Biomed Engn, Bogota, Colombia
[5] Santa Lucia Fdn IRCCS, Smart Lab, Lab Study Mind & Act Rehabil Technol, Via Ardeatina 306, I-00179 Rome, Italy
[6] Sapienza Univ Rome, Dept Comp Control & Management Engn, Rome, Italy
[7] IRCCS S Lucia Fdn, Neuroelect Imaging & BCI Lab, Via Ardeatina 306, I-00179 Rome, Italy
[8] Shirley Ryan AbilityLab, Legs & Walking AbilityLab, Chicago, IL USA
[9] Northwestern Univ, McCormick Sch Engn, Feinberg Sch Med, Dept Phys Med & Rehabil,Dept Biomed Engn, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[10] Northwestern Univ, McCormick Sch Engn, Dept Mech Engn, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
关键词
Stroke; Rehabilitation; Robot; Biomechanics; Electromyography; Biofeedback; Top-down approach; SUBACUTE STROKE PATIENTS; ORTHOSIS; BALANCE; WALKING; PHYSIOTHERAPY; PERFORMANCE; SPASTICITY; SUPPORT; SCALE;
D O I
10.1186/s12984-019-0558-0
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
BackgroundAdd-on robot-mediated therapy has proven to be more effective than conventional therapy alone in post-stroke gait rehabilitation. Such robot-mediated interventions routinely use also visual biofeedback tools. A better understanding of biofeedback content effects when used for robotic locomotor training may improve the rehabilitation process and outcomes.MethodsThis randomized cross-over pilot trial aimed to address the possible impact of different biofeedback contents on patients' performance and experience during Lokomat training, by comparing a novel biofeedback based on online biological electromyographic information (EMGb) versus the commercial joint torque biofeedback (Rb) in sub-acute non ambulatory patients.12 patients were randomized into two treatment groups, A and B, based on two different biofeedback training. For both groups, study protocol consisted of 12 Lokomat sessions, 6 for each biofeedback condition, 40min each, 3 sessions per week of frequency. All patients performed Lokomat trainings as an add-on therapy to the conventional one that was the same for both groups and consisted of 40min per day, 5days per week. The primary outcome was the Modified Ashworth Spasticity Scale, and secondary outcomes included clinical, neurological, mechanical, and personal experience variables collected before and after each biofeedback training.ResultsLokomat training significantly improved gait/daily living activity independence and trunk control, nevertheless, different effects due to biofeedback content were remarked. EMGb was more effective to reduce spasticity and improve muscle force at the ankle, knee and hip joints. Robot data suggest that Rb induces more adaptation to robotic movements than EMGb. Furthermore, Rb was perceived less demanding than EMGb, even though patient motivation was higher for EMGb. Robot was perceived to be effective, easy to use, reliable and safe: acceptability was rated as very high by all patients.ConclusionsSpecific effects can be related to biofeedback content: when muscular-based information is used, a more direct effect on lower limb spasticity and muscle activity is evidenced. In a similar manner, when biofeedback treatment is based on joint torque data, a higher patient compliance effect in terms of force exerted is achieved. Subjects who underwent EMGb seemed to be more motivated than those treated with Rb.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], IEEE INT C REH ROB
[2]  
[Anonymous], INT C REHAB ROBOT
[3]   Virtual sensory feedback for gait improvement in neurological patients [J].
Baram, Yoram .
FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY, 2013, 4
[4]   Understanding sensorimotor adaptation and learning for rehabilitation [J].
Bastian, Amy J. .
CURRENT OPINION IN NEUROLOGY, 2008, 21 (06) :628-633
[5]   Rehabilitation of gait after stroke: a review towards a top-down approach [J].
Belda-Lois, Juan-Manuel ;
Mena-del Horno, Silvia ;
Bermejo-Bosch, Ignacio ;
Moreno, Juan C. ;
Pons, Jose L. ;
Farina, Dario ;
Iosa, Marco ;
Molinari, Marco ;
Tamburella, Federica ;
Ramos, Ander ;
Caria, Andrea ;
Solis-Escalante, Teodoro ;
Brunner, Clemens ;
Rea, Massimiliano .
JOURNAL OF NEUROENGINEERING AND REHABILITATION, 2011, 8
[6]  
BERG KO, 1992, CAN J PUBLIC HEALTH, V83, pS7
[7]   STANDING BALANCE, LOWER-EXTREMITY MUSCLE STRENGTH, AND WALKING PERFORMANCE OF PATIENTS REFERRED FOR PHYSICAL THERAPY [J].
BOHANNON, RW .
PERCEPTUAL AND MOTOR SKILLS, 1995, 80 (02) :379-385
[8]   INTERRATER RELIABILITY OF A MODIFIED ASHWORTH SCALE OF MUSCLE SPASTICITY [J].
BOHANNON, RW ;
SMITH, MB .
PHYSICAL THERAPY, 1987, 67 (02) :206-207
[9]   What does best evidence tell us about robotic gait rehabilitation in stroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Bruni, Maria Federica ;
Melegari, Corrado ;
De Cola, Maria Cristina ;
Bramanti, Alessia ;
Bramanti, Placido ;
Calabro, Rocco Salvatore .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2018, 48 :11-17
[10]   Neuropsychological findings in young-adult stroke patients [J].
Cao, Marina ;
Ferrari, Marco ;
Patella, Rosalba ;
Marra, Camillo ;
Rasura, Maurizia .
ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 2007, 22 (02) :133-142