Cargando…

Comparative Assessment of Robotic versus Classical Physical Therapy Using Muscle Strength and Ranges of Motion Testing in Neurological Diseases

The use of robotic systems in physical rehabilitation protocols has become increasingly attractive and has been given more focus in the last decade as a result of the high prevalence of motor deficits in the population, which is linked to an overburdened healthcare system. In accordance with current...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Major, Zoltán Zsigmond, Vaida, Calin, Major, Kinga Andrea, Tucan, Paul, Brusturean, Emanuela, Gherman, Bogdan, Birlescu, Iosif, Craciunaș, Raul, Ulinici, Ionut, Simori, Gábor, Banica, Alexandru, Pop, Nicoleta, Burz, Alin, Carbone, Giuseppe, Pisla, Doina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8541455/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34683094
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm11100953
_version_ 1784589234332499968
author Major, Zoltán Zsigmond
Vaida, Calin
Major, Kinga Andrea
Tucan, Paul
Brusturean, Emanuela
Gherman, Bogdan
Birlescu, Iosif
Craciunaș, Raul
Ulinici, Ionut
Simori, Gábor
Banica, Alexandru
Pop, Nicoleta
Burz, Alin
Carbone, Giuseppe
Pisla, Doina
author_facet Major, Zoltán Zsigmond
Vaida, Calin
Major, Kinga Andrea
Tucan, Paul
Brusturean, Emanuela
Gherman, Bogdan
Birlescu, Iosif
Craciunaș, Raul
Ulinici, Ionut
Simori, Gábor
Banica, Alexandru
Pop, Nicoleta
Burz, Alin
Carbone, Giuseppe
Pisla, Doina
author_sort Major, Zoltán Zsigmond
collection PubMed
description The use of robotic systems in physical rehabilitation protocols has become increasingly attractive and has been given more focus in the last decade as a result of the high prevalence of motor deficits in the population, which is linked to an overburdened healthcare system. In accordance with current trends, three robotic devices have been designed, called ParReEx Elbow, ParReEx Wrist, and ASPIRE, which were designed to improve upper-limb medical recovery (shoulder, elbow, forearm, and wrist). The three automated systems were tested in a hospital setting with 23 patients (12 men and 11 women) suffering from motor deficits caused by various neurological diseases such as stroke, Parkinson’s disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The patients were divided into three groups based on their pathology (vascular, extrapyramidal, and neuromuscular). Objective clinical measures, such as the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale, goniometry, and dynamometry, were used to compare pre- and post-rehabilitation assessments for both robotic-aided and manual physical rehabilitation therapy. The results of these tests showed that, with the exception of a few minor differences in muscular strength recovery, the robotic-assisted rehabilitation methods performed equally as well as the manual techniques, though only minor improvements were validated during short-term rehabilitation. The greatest achievements were obtained in the goniometric analysis where some rehabilitation amplitudes increased by over 40% in the vascular group, but the same analysis returned regressions in the neuromuscular group. The MRC scale analysis returned no significant differences, with most regressions occurring in the neuromuscular group. The dynamometric analysis mostly returned improvements, but the highest value evolution was 19.07%, which also in the vascular group. While the results were encouraging, more research is needed with a larger sample size and a longer study period in order to provide more information regarding the efficacy of both rehabilitation methods in neurological illnesses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8541455
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85414552021-10-24 Comparative Assessment of Robotic versus Classical Physical Therapy Using Muscle Strength and Ranges of Motion Testing in Neurological Diseases Major, Zoltán Zsigmond Vaida, Calin Major, Kinga Andrea Tucan, Paul Brusturean, Emanuela Gherman, Bogdan Birlescu, Iosif Craciunaș, Raul Ulinici, Ionut Simori, Gábor Banica, Alexandru Pop, Nicoleta Burz, Alin Carbone, Giuseppe Pisla, Doina J Pers Med Article The use of robotic systems in physical rehabilitation protocols has become increasingly attractive and has been given more focus in the last decade as a result of the high prevalence of motor deficits in the population, which is linked to an overburdened healthcare system. In accordance with current trends, three robotic devices have been designed, called ParReEx Elbow, ParReEx Wrist, and ASPIRE, which were designed to improve upper-limb medical recovery (shoulder, elbow, forearm, and wrist). The three automated systems were tested in a hospital setting with 23 patients (12 men and 11 women) suffering from motor deficits caused by various neurological diseases such as stroke, Parkinson’s disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The patients were divided into three groups based on their pathology (vascular, extrapyramidal, and neuromuscular). Objective clinical measures, such as the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale, goniometry, and dynamometry, were used to compare pre- and post-rehabilitation assessments for both robotic-aided and manual physical rehabilitation therapy. The results of these tests showed that, with the exception of a few minor differences in muscular strength recovery, the robotic-assisted rehabilitation methods performed equally as well as the manual techniques, though only minor improvements were validated during short-term rehabilitation. The greatest achievements were obtained in the goniometric analysis where some rehabilitation amplitudes increased by over 40% in the vascular group, but the same analysis returned regressions in the neuromuscular group. The MRC scale analysis returned no significant differences, with most regressions occurring in the neuromuscular group. The dynamometric analysis mostly returned improvements, but the highest value evolution was 19.07%, which also in the vascular group. While the results were encouraging, more research is needed with a larger sample size and a longer study period in order to provide more information regarding the efficacy of both rehabilitation methods in neurological illnesses. MDPI 2021-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8541455/ /pubmed/34683094 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm11100953 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Major, Zoltán Zsigmond
Vaida, Calin
Major, Kinga Andrea
Tucan, Paul
Brusturean, Emanuela
Gherman, Bogdan
Birlescu, Iosif
Craciunaș, Raul
Ulinici, Ionut
Simori, Gábor
Banica, Alexandru
Pop, Nicoleta
Burz, Alin
Carbone, Giuseppe
Pisla, Doina
Comparative Assessment of Robotic versus Classical Physical Therapy Using Muscle Strength and Ranges of Motion Testing in Neurological Diseases
title Comparative Assessment of Robotic versus Classical Physical Therapy Using Muscle Strength and Ranges of Motion Testing in Neurological Diseases
title_full Comparative Assessment of Robotic versus Classical Physical Therapy Using Muscle Strength and Ranges of Motion Testing in Neurological Diseases
title_fullStr Comparative Assessment of Robotic versus Classical Physical Therapy Using Muscle Strength and Ranges of Motion Testing in Neurological Diseases
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Assessment of Robotic versus Classical Physical Therapy Using Muscle Strength and Ranges of Motion Testing in Neurological Diseases
title_short Comparative Assessment of Robotic versus Classical Physical Therapy Using Muscle Strength and Ranges of Motion Testing in Neurological Diseases
title_sort comparative assessment of robotic versus classical physical therapy using muscle strength and ranges of motion testing in neurological diseases
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8541455/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34683094
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm11100953
work_keys_str_mv AT majorzoltanzsigmond comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT vaidacalin comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT majorkingaandrea comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT tucanpaul comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT brustureanemanuela comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT ghermanbogdan comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT birlescuiosif comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT craciunasraul comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT uliniciionut comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT simorigabor comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT banicaalexandru comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT popnicoleta comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT burzalin comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT carbonegiuseppe comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases
AT pisladoina comparativeassessmentofroboticversusclassicalphysicaltherapyusingmusclestrengthandrangesofmotiontestinginneurologicaldiseases