3.9 Article

Implanted neuroprosthesis for assisting arm and hand function after stroke: A case study

期刊

出版社

JOURNAL REHAB RES & DEV
DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2011.09.0171

关键词

assistive device; FES; functional electrical stimulation; hemiplegia; implant; medical device; neuroprosthesis; rehabilitation; stroke rehabilitation; upper limb.

资金

  1. State of Ohio Biomedical Research and Technology Transfer Trust [BRTT 03-005]
  2. National Institutes of Health National Center for Research Resources [M01RR00080, K12RR023264, K24HD054600, R21HD055256]
  3. Cleveland Department of Veterans Affairs Center of Excellence in Functional Electrical Stimulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Loss of arm and hand function is common after stroke. An implantable, 12-channel, electromyogram (EMG)controlled functional electrical stimulation neuroprosthesis (NP) may be a viable assistive device for upper-limb hemiplegia. In this study, a research participant 4.8 yr poststroke underwent presurgical screening, surgical installation of the NP, training, and assessment of upper-limb impairment, activity limitation, and satisfaction over a 2.3 yr period. The NP increased active range of finger extension from 3 to 96 degrees, increased lateral pinch force from 16 to 29 N, increased the number of objects from 1 to 4 out of 6 that the participant could grasp and place in a Grasp-Release Test, and increased the Arm Motor Abilities Test score by 0.3 points. The upper-limb Fugl-Meyer score increased from 27 at baseline to 36 by the end of the study. The participant reported using the NP at home 3-4 d/wk, up to 3 b/d for exercise and household tasks. The effectiveness of the NP to assist with activities of daily living was dependent on the degree of flexor tone, which varied with task and level of fatigue. The EMG-based control strategy was not successfully implemented; button presses were used instead. Further advancements in technology may improve ease of use and address limitations caused by muscle spasticity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据