4.6 Article

Validation of a Hybrid Exoskeleton for Upper Limb Rehabilitation. A Preliminary Study

期刊

SENSORS
卷 21, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s21217342

关键词

rehabilitation; upper-limb; exoskeleton; robot

资金

  1. project LUXBIT: Lightweight Upper limbs eXosuit for BImanual Task Enhancement - Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades [RTI2018-094346-B-I00]
  2. Programa Propio de I+D+i of the Universidad Politecnica de Madrid

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the usability and acceptance of a hybrid exoskeleton called ExoFlex for upper-limb passive rehabilitation in patients with rotator cuff injury. Seven participants aged between 50 to 79, including six women and one man, showed promising results in acceptance and usability, with an average score of 80.71 on the SUS test.
Recovery of therapeutic or functional ambulatory capacity in patients with rotator cuff injury is a primary goal of rehabilitation. Wearable powered exoskeletons allow patients to perform repetitive practice with large movements to maximize recovery, even immediately after the acute event. The aim of this paper is to describe the usability, acceptability and acceptance of a hybrid exoskeleton for upper-limb passive rehabilitation using the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire. This equipment, called ExoFlex, is defined as a hybrid exoskeleton since it is made up of rigid and soft components. The exoskeleton mechanical description is presented along with its control system and the way motion is structured in rehabilitation sessions. Seven patients (six women and one man) have participated in the evaluation of this equipment, which are in the range of 50 to 79 years old. Preliminary evidence of the acceptance and usability by both patients and clinicians are very promising, obtaining an average score of 80.71 in the SUS test, as well as good results in a questionnaire that evaluates the clinicians' perceived usability of ExoFlex.

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

4.6
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