肢体残疾儿童上肢外骨骼和机器人辅助设备的有效性和用户感知:系统综述。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Bai Li, Andrea B Cunha, Michele A Lobo
{"title":"肢体残疾儿童上肢外骨骼和机器人辅助设备的有效性和用户感知:系统综述。","authors":"Bai Li, Andrea B Cunha, Michele A Lobo","doi":"10.1080/01942638.2023.2248241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Systematically determine the effectiveness and users' perceptions of upper extremity (UE) exoskeletons and robot-assisted devices for pediatric rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies with \"exoskeletons\"/\"robot-assisted devices\", children with disabilities, effectiveness data, and English publication. Intervention effectiveness outcomes were classified within components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health, Children and Youth Version (ICF-CY). Secondary data (users' perceptions; implementation setting) were extracted. Risk of bias and methodological quality were assessed. Descriptive analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-two articles were included. Most evaluated body structure and function and activity outcomes with less emphasis on participation. Most effects across all ICF-CY levels were positive. Devices were primarily evaluated in clinical or laboratory rather than natural environments. Perceptions about device effectiveness were mostly positive, while those about expression, accessibility, and esthetics were mostly negative. A need for increased rigor in research study design was detected.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Across populations, devices, settings, interventions, and dosing schedules, UE exoskeletons and robot-assisted devices may improve function, activity, and perhaps participation for children with physical disabilities. Future work should transition devices into natural environments, design devices and implementation strategies to address users' negative perceptions, and increase research rigor.</p>","PeriodicalId":49138,"journal":{"name":"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics","volume":" ","pages":"336-379"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness and Users' Perceptions of Upper Extremity Exoskeletons and Robot-Assisted Devices in Children with Physical Disabilities: Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Bai Li, Andrea B Cunha, Michele A Lobo\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01942638.2023.2248241\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Systematically determine the effectiveness and users' perceptions of upper extremity (UE) exoskeletons and robot-assisted devices for pediatric rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies with \\\"exoskeletons\\\"/\\\"robot-assisted devices\\\", children with disabilities, effectiveness data, and English publication. Intervention effectiveness outcomes were classified within components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health, Children and Youth Version (ICF-CY). Secondary data (users' perceptions; implementation setting) were extracted. Risk of bias and methodological quality were assessed. Descriptive analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-two articles were included. Most evaluated body structure and function and activity outcomes with less emphasis on participation. Most effects across all ICF-CY levels were positive. Devices were primarily evaluated in clinical or laboratory rather than natural environments. Perceptions about device effectiveness were mostly positive, while those about expression, accessibility, and esthetics were mostly negative. A need for increased rigor in research study design was detected.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Across populations, devices, settings, interventions, and dosing schedules, UE exoskeletons and robot-assisted devices may improve function, activity, and perhaps participation for children with physical disabilities. Future work should transition devices into natural environments, design devices and implementation strategies to address users' negative perceptions, and increase research rigor.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49138,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"336-379\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2023.2248241\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2023.2248241","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:系统地确定上肢(UE)外骨骼和机器人辅助设备在儿科康复中的有效性和用户感知:方法:在 PubMedline/Medline、Web of Science、Scopus 和 Cochrane Library 中搜索有关 "外骨骼"/"机器人辅助设备"、残疾儿童、有效性数据和英文出版物的研究。干预效果根据《国际功能、残疾和健康分类:儿童和青少年版》(ICF-CY)的组成部分进行分类。提取了辅助数据(使用者的看法;实施环境)。对偏倚风险和方法质量进行了评估。对结果进行了描述性分析:结果:共纳入 72 篇文章。大多数文章对身体结构和功能以及活动结果进行了评估,但较少强调参与性。在所有 ICF-CY 级别中,大多数效果都是积极的。设备主要是在临床或实验室而非自然环境中进行评估。对矫形器有效性的看法大多是积极的,而对其表现力、可及性和美观性的看法则大多是消极的。研究发现,研究设计需要更加严格:结论:在不同的人群、设备、环境、干预措施和剂量计划中,UE 外骨骼和机器人辅助设备可以改善肢体残疾儿童的功能、活动和参与。未来的工作应将设备过渡到自然环境中,设计设备和实施策略以解决用户的负面看法,并提高研究的严谨性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness and Users' Perceptions of Upper Extremity Exoskeletons and Robot-Assisted Devices in Children with Physical Disabilities: Systematic Review.

Aim: Systematically determine the effectiveness and users' perceptions of upper extremity (UE) exoskeletons and robot-assisted devices for pediatric rehabilitation.

Methods: PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies with "exoskeletons"/"robot-assisted devices", children with disabilities, effectiveness data, and English publication. Intervention effectiveness outcomes were classified within components of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health, Children and Youth Version (ICF-CY). Secondary data (users' perceptions; implementation setting) were extracted. Risk of bias and methodological quality were assessed. Descriptive analyses were performed.

Results: Seventy-two articles were included. Most evaluated body structure and function and activity outcomes with less emphasis on participation. Most effects across all ICF-CY levels were positive. Devices were primarily evaluated in clinical or laboratory rather than natural environments. Perceptions about device effectiveness were mostly positive, while those about expression, accessibility, and esthetics were mostly negative. A need for increased rigor in research study design was detected.

Conclusions: Across populations, devices, settings, interventions, and dosing schedules, UE exoskeletons and robot-assisted devices may improve function, activity, and perhaps participation for children with physical disabilities. Future work should transition devices into natural environments, design devices and implementation strategies to address users' negative perceptions, and increase research rigor.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: 5 issues per year Abstracted and/or indexed in: AMED; British Library Inside; Child Development Abstracts; CINAHL; Contents Pages in Education; EBSCO; Education Research Abstracts (ERA); Education Resources Information Center (ERIC); EMCARE; Excerpta Medica/EMBASE; Family and Society Studies Worldwide; Family Index Database; Google Scholar; HaPI Database; HINARI; Index Copernicus; Intute; JournalSeek; MANTIS; MEDLINE; NewJour; OCLC; OTDBASE; OT SEARCH; Otseeker; PEDro; ProQuest; PsycINFO; PSYCLINE; PubsHub; PubMed; REHABDATA; SCOPUS; SIRC; Social Work Abstracts; Speical Educational Needs Abstracts; SwetsWise; Zetoc (British Library); Science Citation Index Expanded (also known as SciSearch®); Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition; Social Sciences Citation Index®; Journal Citation Reports/ Social Sciences Edition; Current Contents®/Social and Behavioral Sciences; Current Contents®/Clinical Medicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信