Robotic Technology and Stroke Rehabilitation: Translating Research into Practice

REFERENCES

• American Heart Association. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics -2004 Update. Dallas, TX: American Heart Association; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Duncan PW, Goldstein LB, Matchar D, Divine GW, Feussner J. Measurement of motor recovery after stroke. Stroke. 1992;23:1084–1089.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendricks HT, van Limbeek J, Geurts AC, Zwarts MJ. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review of the literature. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:1629–1637.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou H, Vive-Larsen J, Stoier M, Olsen T. Outcome and time course of recovery, Part II: Time course of recov-ery, the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76:406–412.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N. Is robot-aided senso-rimotor training in stroke rehabilitation a realistic option? Curr Opin Neurol. 2001;14:745–752.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:347–354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Lee JH, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Vogelaar TVV, Deville WL, Bouter LM. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients. Stroke. 1999;30:2369–2375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liepert J, Bauder H, Wolfgang HR, Miltner WH, Taub E, Weiller C. Treatment-induced cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. Stroke. 2000;31:1210–1216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn M. Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke? Stroke. 2000;31: 2984–2988.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitall J, McCombe Waller S, Silver KH, Macko RF. Repetitive bilateral arm training with rhythmic auditory cueing improves motor function in chron-ic hemiparetic stroke. Stroke. 2000;31:2390–2395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aisen ML, Krebs HI, Hogan N, McDowell F, Volpe BT. The effect of robot assisted therapy and reha-bilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Arch Neurol. 1997;54:443–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Edelstein L, Diels CM, Aisen ML. A novel approach to stroke reha-bilitation: robot-aided sensorimotor stimulation. Neurology. 2000;54:1938–1944.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Stein J, Frontera WR, Hogan N. Effects of robotic therapy on motor impairment and recovery in chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:477–482.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, Majmundar M, van der Loos M. Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor func-tion after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83: 952–959.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferraro M, Palazzolo JJ, Krol J, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Volpe BT. Robot-aided sensorimotor arm training improves outcome in patients with chronic stroke. Neurology. 2003;61:1604–1607.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Stein J, Frontera WR, Hughes R, Hogan N. Robotic therapy for chronic motor impairments after stroke: follow-up results. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:1106–1111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tejima N. Rehabilitation robotics: a review. Adv Robotics. 2000;14:551–564.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stefanov DH, Bien Z, Bang W-C. The smart house for older persons and persons with physical dis-abilities: structure, technology arrangements, and perspectives. IEEE Trans Neural Systems Rehabil Eng. 2004;12:228–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krebs HI, Hogan N, Aisen ML, Volpe BT. Robot-aided neuro-rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 1998;6(1):75–87.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Aisen MD, Hogan N. Increasing productivity and quality of care: robot-aided neuro-rehabilitation. I Rehabil Res Dev. 2000;37: 639–652.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinkensmeyer DJ, Wynne JFI, Harkema SJ. A robotic tool or studying locomotor adaptation and rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the Second Joint EMBS/BMES Conference. Houston, TX: IEEE; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Hogan N, Krebs HI, Sharon A, Charnnarong J. Interactive robotic therapist. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 1995. US patent 5,466,213.
   Google Scholar
• Colgate JE, Hogan N. Robust control of dynami-cally interacting systems. Intl Control. 1988;48(1): 65–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgar CG, Lum S, Shor M, Van der Loos HF. Development of robots for rehabilitation therapy: the Palo Alto VA/Stanford experience. I Rehabil Res Dev. 2000;37: 663–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferraro M, Hogan-Demaio J, Krol J, et al. Assessing the Motor Status Score: a scale for the evaluation of upper limb motor outcomes in patients after stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002;16(3):283–289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volpe BT, Krebs HI, Hogan N, Edelstein L, Diels CM, Aisen ML. Robot training enhanced motor outcome in patients with stroke maintained over 3 years. Neurology. 1999;53:1874–1876.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lum P, Reinkensmeyer D, Mahoney R, Rymer WZ, Burgar C. Robotic devices for movement therapy after stroke: current status and challenges to clinical acceptance. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2002;8(4):40–53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fasoli SE, Krebs HI, Ferraro M, Hogan N, Volpe BT. Does shorter rehabilitation limit potential recovery post-stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2004;18:88–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stein J, Krebs HI, Frontera WR, Fasoli SE, Hughes R, Hogan N. A comparison of two techniques of robot-aided upper limb exercise training after stroke. Am I Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;83:720–728.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medicare program; changes to the inpatient reha-bilitation facility prospective payment system and fiscal year 2004 rates; final rule. 42 CFR, Part 412, August 1, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Smits JG. Recovery rate constants of recovery from stroke. I Neurovascular Dis. 1997;2:211–219.
   Google Scholar
• Reinkensmeyer DJ, Dewald JPA, Rymer WZ. Guidance based quantification of arm impairment following brain injury: a pilot study. IEEE TransRehabil Eng. 1999;7:1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Reinkensmeyer DJ, Kahn LE, Averbuch M, McKenna-Cole AN, Schmit BD, Rymer WZ. Understanding and treating arm movement impairment after chronic brain injury: progress with the ARM Guide. I Rehabil Res Dev. 2000;37:653–662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn LE, Zygman ML, Rymer WZ, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Effect of robot-assisted and unassisted exercise on functional reaching in chronic hemiparesis. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Conference; Istanbul, Turkey; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Kahn LE, Averbuch M, Rymer WZ, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Comparison of robot-assisted reaching to free reaching in promoting recovery from chronic stroke. In: Mokhtari M, ed. Integration of Assistive Technology in the Information Age. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2001:39–44.
   Google Scholar
• Krebs HI, et al. Variations on a theme: different rehabilitation robotics methods achieve different results. Manuscript in preparation.
   Google Scholar
• Mahoney RM, Van der Loos HFM, Lum PS, Burgar C. Robotic stroke therapy assistant. Robotica. 2003;21:33–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krebs HI, Ferraro M, Buerger SP, et al. Rehabilitation robotics: pilot trial of a spatial extension for MIT-Manus. I NeuroEng Rehabil. In press. www.biomed-central.com
   Google Scholar
• Krebs HI, Celestino J, Williams D, Ferraro M, Volpe BT, Hogan N. A wrist extension to MIT-MANUS [chap. 24]. In: Bien Z, Stefanov D, eds. Advances in Human-Friendly Robotic Technologies for Movement Assistance/Movement Restoration for People with Disabilities; Springer-Verlag series Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Volpe BT, Ferraro M, Lynch D, et al. Robotics and other devices in the treatment of patients recovering from stroke. Curr Artherosderosis Rep. 2004;6:314–319.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Lennihan L, Fasoli S, Lynch D, Dominick L, Hogan N. Notes on rehabilita-tion robotics and stroke. In: Lofaso F, Roby-Brami A, Ravaud JF, eds. Technological Innovations and Handicap. Paris: Frison Roche. In press.
   Google Scholar
• Carignan C, Cleary K, Krebs HI, Tannenbaum A. Robotic Rehabilitation and Diagnosis Using Bilateral Force Feedback over the Internet. 2003 International Workshop on Virtual Rehabilitation. New Jersey: Rutgers University.
   Google Scholar
• WorldHealthOrganization.InternationalClassification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICE. Geneva: WHO; 2001.
   Google Scholar