Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2019 Apr 9;55(4):98.
doi: 10.3390/medicina55040098.

Influence of New Technologies on Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: A Comparison of Armeo Spring to the Kinect System

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Influence of New Technologies on Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: A Comparison of Armeo Spring to the Kinect System

Aušra Adomavičienė et al. Medicina (Kaunas). .

Abstract

Background: New technologies to improve post-stroke rehabilitation outcomes are of great interest and have a positive impact on functional, motor, and cognitive recovery. Identifying the most effective rehabilitation intervention is a recognized priority for stroke research and provides an opportunity to achieve a more desirable effect.

Objective: The objective is to verify the effect of new technologies on motor outcomes of the upper limbs, functional state, and cognitive functions in post-stroke rehabilitation.

Methods: Forty two post-stroke patients (8.69 ± 4.27 weeks after stroke onset) were involved in the experimental study during inpatient rehabilitation. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: conventional programs were combined with the Armeo Spring robot-assisted trainer (Armeo group; n = 17) and the Kinect-based system (Kinect group; n = 25). The duration of sessions with the new technological devices was 45 min/day (10 sessions in total). Functional recovery was compared among groups using the Functional Independence Measure (FIM), and upper limbs' motor function recovery was compared using the Fugl⁻Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), Hand grip strength (dynamometry), Hand Tapping test (HTT), Box and Block Test (BBT), and kinematic measures (active Range Of Motion (ROM)), while cognitive functions were assessed by the MMSE (Mini-Mental State Examination), ACE-R (Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised), and HAD (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) scores.

Results: Functional independence did not show meaningful differences in scores between technologies (p > 0.05), though abilities of self-care were significantly higher after Kinect-based training (p < 0.05). The upper limbs' kinematics demonstrated higher functional recovery after robot training: decreased muscle tone, improved shoulder and elbow ROMs, hand dexterity, and grip strength (p < 0.05). Besides, virtual reality games involve more arm rotation and performing wider movements. Both new technologies caused an increase in overall global cognitive changes, but visual constructive abilities (attention, memory, visuospatial abilities, and complex commands) were statistically higher after robotic therapy. Furthermore, decreased anxiety level was observed after virtual reality therapy (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: Our study displays that even a short-term, two-week training program with new technologies had a positive effect and significantly recovered post-strokes functional level in self-care, upper limb motor ability (dexterity and movements, grip strength, kinematic data), visual constructive abilities (attention, memory, visuospatial abilities, and complex commands) and decreased anxiety level.

Keywords: Armeo; Kinect; cognitive recovery; hand motor function; stroke rehabilitation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flowchart for patients’ selection, assessment, and analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE–R score) (post-pre) distribution for different abilities in the groups (n = 36). Values are represented as the mean ± SD. The Kruskal–Wallis test was used for comparison.

References

    1. Langhorne P., Legg L. Evidence behind stroke rehabilitation. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry. 2003 doi: 10.1136/jnnp.74.suppl_4.iv18. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Levin M.F., Kleim J.A., Wolf S.L. What Do Motor “Recovery” and “Compensation” Mean in Patients Following Stroke? Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 2009 doi: 10.1177/1545968308328727. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mehrholz J., Hädrich A., Platz T., Kugler J., Pohl M. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving generic activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2012 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006876.pub3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Subramanian S.K., Massie C.L., Malcolm M.P., Levin M.F. Does provision of extrinsic feedback result in improved motor learning in the upper limb poststroke? A systematic review of the evidence. Neurorehabil. Neural. Repair. 2010 doi: 10.1177/1545968309349941. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Liao W., McCombe Waller S., Whitall J. Kinect-based individualized upper extremity rehabilitation is effective and feasible for individuals with stroke using a transition from clinic to home protocol. Cogent. Med. 2018;5:1–12. doi: 10.1080/2331205X.2018.1428038. - DOI

MeSH terms