Cargando…
Robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features
Children with physical disabilities often have limited performance in daily activities, hindering their physical development, social development and mental health. Therefore, rehabilitation is essential to mitigate the adverse effects of the different causes of physical disabilities and improve inde...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8420060/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34488777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-021-00920-5 |
_version_ | 1783748883638124544 |
---|---|
author | Gonzalez, Alberto Garcia, Lorenzo Kilby, Jeff McNair, Peter |
author_facet | Gonzalez, Alberto Garcia, Lorenzo Kilby, Jeff McNair, Peter |
author_sort | Gonzalez, Alberto |
collection | PubMed |
description | Children with physical disabilities often have limited performance in daily activities, hindering their physical development, social development and mental health. Therefore, rehabilitation is essential to mitigate the adverse effects of the different causes of physical disabilities and improve independence and quality of life. In the last decade, robotic rehabilitation has shown the potential to augment traditional physical rehabilitation. However, to date, most robotic rehabilitation devices are designed for adult patients who differ in their needs compared to paediatric patients, limiting the devices’ potential because the paediatric patients’ needs are not adequately considered. With this in mind, the current work reviews the existing literature on robotic rehabilitation for children with physical disabilities, intending to summarise how the rehabilitation robots could fulfil children’s needs and inspire researchers to develop new devices. A literature search was conducted utilising the Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus databases. Based on the inclusion–exclusion criteria, 206 publications were included, and 58 robotic devices used by children with a physical disability were identified. Different design factors and the treated conditions using robotic technology were compared. Through the analyses, it was identified that weight, safety, operability and motivation were crucial factors to the successful design of devices for children. The majority of the current devices were used for lower limb rehabilitation. Neurological disorders, in particular cerebral palsy, were the most common conditions for which devices were designed. By far, the most common actuator was the electric motor. Usually, the devices present more than one training strategy being the assistive strategy the most used. The admittance/impedance method is the most popular to interface the robot with the children. Currently, there is a trend on developing exoskeletons, as they can assist children with daily life activities outside of the rehabilitation setting, propitiating a wider adoption of the technology. With this shift in focus, it appears likely that new technologies to actuate the system (e.g. serial elastic actuators) and to detect the intention (e.g. physiological signals) of children as they go about their daily activities will be required. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8420060 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84200602021-09-09 Robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features Gonzalez, Alberto Garcia, Lorenzo Kilby, Jeff McNair, Peter Biomed Eng Online Review Children with physical disabilities often have limited performance in daily activities, hindering their physical development, social development and mental health. Therefore, rehabilitation is essential to mitigate the adverse effects of the different causes of physical disabilities and improve independence and quality of life. In the last decade, robotic rehabilitation has shown the potential to augment traditional physical rehabilitation. However, to date, most robotic rehabilitation devices are designed for adult patients who differ in their needs compared to paediatric patients, limiting the devices’ potential because the paediatric patients’ needs are not adequately considered. With this in mind, the current work reviews the existing literature on robotic rehabilitation for children with physical disabilities, intending to summarise how the rehabilitation robots could fulfil children’s needs and inspire researchers to develop new devices. A literature search was conducted utilising the Web of Science, PubMed and Scopus databases. Based on the inclusion–exclusion criteria, 206 publications were included, and 58 robotic devices used by children with a physical disability were identified. Different design factors and the treated conditions using robotic technology were compared. Through the analyses, it was identified that weight, safety, operability and motivation were crucial factors to the successful design of devices for children. The majority of the current devices were used for lower limb rehabilitation. Neurological disorders, in particular cerebral palsy, were the most common conditions for which devices were designed. By far, the most common actuator was the electric motor. Usually, the devices present more than one training strategy being the assistive strategy the most used. The admittance/impedance method is the most popular to interface the robot with the children. Currently, there is a trend on developing exoskeletons, as they can assist children with daily life activities outside of the rehabilitation setting, propitiating a wider adoption of the technology. With this shift in focus, it appears likely that new technologies to actuate the system (e.g. serial elastic actuators) and to detect the intention (e.g. physiological signals) of children as they go about their daily activities will be required. BioMed Central 2021-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8420060/ /pubmed/34488777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-021-00920-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Gonzalez, Alberto Garcia, Lorenzo Kilby, Jeff McNair, Peter Robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features |
title | Robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features |
title_full | Robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features |
title_fullStr | Robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features |
title_full_unstemmed | Robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features |
title_short | Robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features |
title_sort | robotic devices for paediatric rehabilitation: a review of design features |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8420060/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34488777 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-021-00920-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gonzalezalberto roboticdevicesforpaediatricrehabilitationareviewofdesignfeatures AT garcialorenzo roboticdevicesforpaediatricrehabilitationareviewofdesignfeatures AT kilbyjeff roboticdevicesforpaediatricrehabilitationareviewofdesignfeatures AT mcnairpeter roboticdevicesforpaediatricrehabilitationareviewofdesignfeatures |