IF 3.4 3区 综合性期刊 Q2 CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL
Sensors Pub Date : 2025-03-06 DOI:10.3390/s25051612
Ophélie Pila, Christophe Duret
{"title":"How Can Robotic Devices Help Clinicians Determine the Treatment Dose for Post-Stroke Arm Paresis?","authors":"Ophélie Pila, Christophe Duret","doi":"10.3390/s25051612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Upper limb training dose after stroke is usually quantified by time and repetitions. This study analyzed upper limb motor training dose in stroke participants (N = 36) using a more comprehensive approach. Participants, classified by initial motor severity (severe/moderate/mild) and recovery trajectory (good/poor), received daily robotic and occupational therapy. Treatment dose was reported using a multidimensional framework. Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) score and robot-derived kinematic parameters (reach distance (cm), velocity (cm/s), accuracy (cm) and smoothness (number of velocity peaks)) were analyzed pre- and post-intervention. FMA scores (mean (SD)) improved significantly post-intervention in severe (+11 (12) pts; <i>p</i> < 0.001) and moderate (+13 (6) pts; <i>p</i> ≤ 0.01) impairment groups. In the severe group, good recoverers showed greater improvement (+18 (12) pts) than poor recoverers (+4 (4) pts). Despite similar robotic therapy duration (34 min/session) and number of movements (600-900/session) between good and poor recoverers, both groups experienced very different therapeutic plans in the use of physical modalities: good recoverers gradually moved from assisted to the unassisted then resisted modality. Kinematic analysis showed distinct patterns of motor improvement across severity levels, ranging from quantitative (reach distance/velocity) to qualitative (accuracy/smoothness) changes. This approach provides a more accurate description of the therapeutic dose by characterizing the movements actually performed and can help personalize rehabilitation strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":21698,"journal":{"name":"Sensors","volume":"25 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11902740/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sensors","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/s25051612","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, ANALYTICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

中风后的上肢训练剂量通常通过时间和重复次数来量化。本研究采用更全面的方法分析了中风患者(36 人)的上肢运动训练剂量。参与者按初始运动严重程度(重度/中度/轻度)和恢复轨迹(良好/较差)分类,每天接受机器人和作业疗法。治疗剂量采用多维框架进行报告。对干预前后的Fugl-Meyer评估(FMA)得分和机器人运动学参数(到达距离(厘米)、速度(厘米/秒)、准确度(厘米)和平滑度(速度峰值的数量))进行了分析。干预后,重度(+11 (12)分;p < 0.001)和中度(+13 (6)分;p ≤ 0.01)障碍组的 FMA 评分(平均值(标清))明显提高。在重度组中,恢复良好者(+18 (12)分)比恢复不良者(+4 (4)分)有更大的改善。尽管康复效果好和康复效果差的患者接受机器人治疗的时间(34 分钟/次)和运动次数(600-900 次/次)相似,但两组患者在物理模式的使用上却经历了截然不同的治疗方案:康复效果好的患者逐渐从辅助模式转为无辅助模式,然后又转为阻力模式。运动学分析表明,在不同严重程度的患者中,运动改善的模式各不相同,既有定量变化(伸手距离/速度),也有定性变化(准确性/平滑度)。这种方法通过描述实际完成的动作,更准确地描述了治疗剂量,有助于制定个性化的康复策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Can Robotic Devices Help Clinicians Determine the Treatment Dose for Post-Stroke Arm Paresis?

Upper limb training dose after stroke is usually quantified by time and repetitions. This study analyzed upper limb motor training dose in stroke participants (N = 36) using a more comprehensive approach. Participants, classified by initial motor severity (severe/moderate/mild) and recovery trajectory (good/poor), received daily robotic and occupational therapy. Treatment dose was reported using a multidimensional framework. Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) score and robot-derived kinematic parameters (reach distance (cm), velocity (cm/s), accuracy (cm) and smoothness (number of velocity peaks)) were analyzed pre- and post-intervention. FMA scores (mean (SD)) improved significantly post-intervention in severe (+11 (12) pts; p < 0.001) and moderate (+13 (6) pts; p ≤ 0.01) impairment groups. In the severe group, good recoverers showed greater improvement (+18 (12) pts) than poor recoverers (+4 (4) pts). Despite similar robotic therapy duration (34 min/session) and number of movements (600-900/session) between good and poor recoverers, both groups experienced very different therapeutic plans in the use of physical modalities: good recoverers gradually moved from assisted to the unassisted then resisted modality. Kinematic analysis showed distinct patterns of motor improvement across severity levels, ranging from quantitative (reach distance/velocity) to qualitative (accuracy/smoothness) changes. This approach provides a more accurate description of the therapeutic dose by characterizing the movements actually performed and can help personalize rehabilitation strategies.

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
Sensors
Sensors 工程技术-电化学
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
12.80%
发文量
8430
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: Sensors (ISSN 1424-8220) provides an advanced forum for the science and technology of sensors and biosensors. It publishes reviews (including comprehensive reviews on the complete sensors products), regular research papers and short notes. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.
×
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