Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T00:13:18.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Muscle weakness assessment tool for automated therapy selection in elbow rehabilitation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2022

Sakshi Gupta Open the ORCID record for Sakshi Gupta [Opens in a new window] ,
Anupam Agrawal  and
Ekta Singla Open the ORCID record for Ekta Singla [Opens in a new window]
Sakshi Gupta
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Ropar, Rupnagar, India
Anupam Agrawal
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Ropar, Rupnagar, India
Ekta Singla*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Ropar, Rupnagar, India
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: ekta@iitrpr.ac.in
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Clinical observations and subjective judgements have traditionally been used to evaluate patients with muscular and neurological disorders. As a result, identifying and analyzing functional improvements are difficult, especially in the absence of expertise. Quantitative assessment, which serves as the motivation for this study, is an essential prerequisite to forecast the task of the rehabilitation device in order to develop rehabilitation training. This work provides a quantitative assessment tool for muscle weakness in the human upper limbs for robotic-assisted rehabilitation. The goal is to map the assessment metrics to the recommended rehabilitation exercises. Measurable interaction forces and muscle correlation factors are the selected parameters to design a framework for muscular nerve cell condition detection and appropriate limb trajectory selection. In this work, a data collection setup is intended for extracting muscle intervention and assessment using MyoMeter, Goniometer and surface electromyography data for upper limbs. Force signals and human physiological response data are evaluated and categorized to infer the relevant progress. Based upon the most influencing muscles, curve fitting is performed. Trajectory-based data points are collected through a scaled geometric Open-Sim musculoskeletal model that fits the subject’s anthropometric data. These data are found to be most suitable to prescribe relevant exercise and to design customized robotic assistance. Case studies demonstrate the approach’s efficacy, including optimally synthesized automated configuration for the desired trajectory.

Keywords

rehabilitation roboticstask-based deviceupper-limb exoskeletonmuscles weakness assessment toolelectromyography
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , March 2023 , pp. 833 - 849
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Guiraud, D., “Interfacing the neural system to restore deficient functions: From theoretical studies to neuroprothesis design,” C. R. Biol. 335(1), 1–8 (2012).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wahl, A.-S. and Schwab, M. E., “Finding an optimal rehabilitation paradigm after stroke: Enhancing fiber growth and training of the brain at the right moment,” Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 381 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olaya, A. F. R. and Delis, A. L., “Emerging Technologies for Neuro-Rehabilitation after Stroke: Robotic Exoskeletons and Active Fes-Assisted Therapy,” In: Assistive Technologies for Physical and Cognitive Disabilities, (IGI Global, 2015) pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Lo, A. C., Guarino, P. D., Richards, L. G., Haselkorn, J. K., Wittenberg, G. F., Federman, D. G., Ringer, R. J., Wagner, T. H., Krebs, H. I., Volpe, B. T., Bever, C. T. Jr., Bravata, D. M., Duncan, P. W., Corn, B. H., Maffucci, A. D., Nadeau, S. E., Conroy, S. S., Powell, J. M., Huang, G. D. and Peduzzi, P., “Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke,” New Engl. J. Med. 362(19), 1772–1783 (2010).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jezernik, S., Colombo, G. and Morari, M., “Automatic gait-pattern adaptation algorithms for rehabilitation with a 4-dof robotic orthosis,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 20(3), 574–582 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duret, C. and Mazzoleni, S., “Upper limb robotics applied to neurorehabilitation: An overview of clinical practice,” NeuroRehabilitation 41(1), 5–15 (2017).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rieger, J. M., Constantinescu, G., Redmond, M. J., Scott, D. K., King, B. R., Fedorak, M. V. and Lundgren, H., Systems and methods for diagnosis and treatment of swallowing disorders, July 6 2017. US Patent App. 15/313, 892. Google Scholar
Song, R. and Tong, K. Y., “EMG and kinematic analysis of sensorimotor control for patients after stroke using cyclic voluntary movement with visual feedback,” J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 10(1), 1–10 (2013).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gladstone, D. J., Danells, C. J. and Black, S. E., “The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: A critical review of its measurement properties,” Neurorehab. Neural Repair 16(3), 232–240 (2002).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radomski, M. V. and Latham, C. A. T.. Occupational Therapy for Physical Dysfunction (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, (2008).Google Scholar
Kim, J., Kim, H. and Kim, J., “Quantitative Assessment Test for Upper-Limb Motor Function By Using Emg and Kinematic Analysis in the Practice of Occupational Therapy,” In: 2017 39th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) (IEEE, 2017) pp. 1158–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majidirad, A., Yihun, Y. and Cure, L., “Toward an integrated intervention and assessment of robot-based rehabilitation,” J. Eng. Sci. Med. Diagn. Therapy 3(2), 1 (2020).Google Scholar
Garcia-Sanjuan, F., Jaen, J. and Nacher, V., “Tangibot: A tangible-mediated robot to support cognitive games for ageing people—A usability study,” Pervasive Mob. Comput. 34, 91–105 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canning, C. G., Ada, L. and O’Dwyer, N. J., “Abnormal muscle activation characteristics associated with loss of dexterity after stroke,” J. Neurol. Sci. 176(1), 45–56 (2000).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chae, J., Yang, G., Park, B. K. and Labatia, I., “Muscle weakness and cocontraction in upper limb hemiparesis: relationship to motor impairment and physical disability,” Neurorehab. Neural Repair 16(3), 241–248 (2002).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleischer, C., “Controlling exoskeletons with EMG signals and a biomechanical body model”, Ph.D. Dissertation (2007).Google Scholar
Cavallaro, E. E., Rosen, J., Perry, J. C. and Burns, S., “Real-time myoprocessors for a neural controlled powered exoskeleton arm,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 53(11), 2387–2396 (2006).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aung, Y. M. and Al-Jumaily, A., “Estimation of upper limb joint angle using surface emg signal,” Int. J. Adv. Robot Syst. 10(10), 369 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elamvazuthi, I., Ling, G. A., Nurhanim, K. A. R. K., Vasant, P. and Parasuraman, S., “Surface Electromyography (semg) Feature Extraction Based on Daubechies Wavelets,” In: 2013 IEEE 8th Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), (IEEE, 2013) pp. 1492–1495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nurhanim, K., Elamvazuthi, I., Vasant, P., Ganesan, T., Parasuraman, S. and Ahamed Khan, M. K. A., “Joint torque estimation model of Surface Electromyography (SEMG) based on swarm intelligence algorithm for robotic assistive device,” Procedia Comput. Sci. 42, 175–182 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, H., Park, H., Lee, S. and Kim, D., “Joint torque estimation using semg and deep neural network,” J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 15(5), 2287–2298 (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, W., Electromyogram analysis, University of Delaware., Online course material, Retrieved July, 5: 2016, 2011.Google Scholar
Thompson, S. B. N. and Morgan, M.. Occupational Therapy for Stroke Rehabilitation (Springer, US, 2013).Google Scholar
O’Sullivan, S. B., Schmitz, T. J. and Fulk, G.. Physical Rehabilitation (FA Davis, Philadelphia, 2019).Google Scholar
De Leva, P., “Adjustments to zatsiorsky-seluyanov’s segment inertia parameters,” J. Biomech. 29(9), 1223–1230 (1996).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plagenhoef, S., Gaynor Evans, F. and Abdelnour, T., “Anatomical data for analyzing human motion,” Res. Q. Exercise Sport. 54(2), 169–178 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar