Artificial Intelligence in Upper Limb Robot-Aided Physical Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review

Purpose Stroke, spinal cord injury and other neuromuscular disorders lead to impairments in the human body. Upper limb impairments, especially hand impairments affect activities of daily living (ADL) and reduce the quality of life. The purpose of this review is to compare and evaluate the available robotic rehabilitation and assistive devices that can lead to motor recovery or maintain the current motor functional level. Methods A systematic review was conducted of the literature published in the years from 2016–2021, to focus on the most recent rehabilitation and assistive devices available in the market or research environments. Results A total of 230 studies published between 2016 and 2021 were identified from various databases. 107 were excluded with various reasons. Twenty-eight studies were taken into detailed review, to determine the efficacy of robotic devices in improving upper limb impairments or maintaining the current level from getting worse. Conclusion It was concluded that with a good strategy and treatment plan; appropriate and regular use of these robotic rehabilitation and assistive devices do lead to improvements in current conditions of most of the subjects and prolonged use may lead to motor recovery. Implications for Rehabilitation Stroke, accidents, spinal cord injuries and other neuromuscular disorders lead to impairments. Upper limb impairments have a tremendous adverse affect on ADL and reduces quality of life drastically. Advancement in technology has led to the designing of many robotic assistive and rehabilitation devices to assist in motor recovery or aid in ADL. This review analyses different available devices for rehabilitation and assistance and points out that use of these devices in time does help in motor recovery. Most of the studies reviewed showed improvements for the user. Future devices should be more portable and easier to use from home,

Comparing effects of constraint-induced movement therapy and robotic therapy: Randomized clinical trial

Upper limb (UL) hemiparesis is one of the most disabling consequences of a stroke. In addition to spontaneous recovery, post-stroke motor recovery is associated with adaptive neuroplasticity and motor learning. Factors affecting motor learning and adaptive neuroplasticity include the presence of genetic polymorphisms. Evidence is emerging that these polymorphisms can influence UL motor recovery. However, the implications of these polymorphisms on rehabilitation are unclear. Using a systematic review and meta analysis, we examined the influence of genetic polymorphisms on post-stroke UL motor recovery. We conducted a systematic review of the published literature in English language. The Down’s and Black checklist helped evaluate the quality of the published studies. We compared changes in UL motor impairment and activity levels between groups with and without the polymorphisms using standardized mean differences and derived summary effect sizes. Seven studies that examined the effects of genetic polymorphisms on UL motor recovery were obtained. The studies examined the effects of polymorphisms (presence of met alleles) in brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF, 5 studies) and Catechol- O -Methyltransferase (COMT, 1 study). One study assessed the effects of Apolipoprotein polymorphism (ApoE ε4). The Fugl Meyer Assessment and Wolf Motor Function Test outcomes assessed motor impairment and activity levels respectively. The quality of the published studies ranged from fair to good. The meta analysis revealed that presence of met allele in BDNF negatively influenced the recovery of motor impairment (moderate effect size -0.47). In addition, recovery of activity levels for people with moderate and high levels of motor ability (effect sizes -1.39 and -7.37 respectively) were also negatively impacted by the presence of met allele in BDNF. The met allele in COMT also negatively influenced recovery of motor impairment (effect size -2.66). Presence of ApoE ε4 did not influence UL motor recovery. In conclusion, the presence of genetic polymorphisms negatively influences the recovery of UL motor impairment and activity. These factors need to be considered while selecting rehabilitation interventions to maximize levels of UL motor recovery post-stroke.

Objective. The aim of the study was to present a systematic review of studies that investigate the effects of robot-assisted therapy on motor and functional recovery in patients with stroke. Methods. A database of articles published up to October 2006 was compiled using the following Medline key words: cerebral vascular accident, cerebral vascular disorders, stroke, paresis, hemiplegia, upper extremity, arm, and robot. References listed in relevant publications were also screened. Studies that satisfied the following selection criteria were included: (1) patients were diagnosed with cerebral vascular accident; (2) effects of robot-assisted therapy for the upper limb were investigated; (3) the outcome was measured in terms of motor and/or functional recovery of the upper paretic limb; and (4) the study was a randomized clinical trial (RCT). For each outcome measure, the estimated effect size (ES) and the summary effect size (SES) expressed in standard deviation units (SDU) were calculated for motor recovery and functional ability (activities of daily living [ADLs]) using fixed and random effect models. Ten studies, involving 218 patients, were included in the synthesis. Their methodological quality ranged from 4 to 8 on a (maximum) 10-point scale. Results. Meta-analysis showed a nonsignificant heterogeneous SES in terms of upper limb motor recovery. Sensitivity analysis of studies involving only shoulder-elbow robotics subsequently demonstrated a significant homogeneous SES for motor recovery of the upper paretic limb. No significant SES was observed for functional ability (ADL). Conclusion. As a result of marked heterogeneity in studies between distal and proximal arm robotics, no overall significant effect in favor of robot-assisted therapy was found in the present meta-analysis. However, subsequent sensitivity analysis showed a significant improvement in upper limb motor function after stroke for upper arm robotics. No significant improvement was found in ADL function. However, the administered ADL scales in the reviewed studies fail to adequately reflect recovery of the paretic upper limb, whereas valid instruments that measure outcome of dexterity of the paretic arm and hand are mostly absent in selected studies. Future research into the effects of robot-assisted therapy should therefore distinguish between upper and lower robotics arm training and concentrate on kinematical analysis to differentiate between genuine upper limb motor recovery and functional recovery due to compensation strategies by proximal control of the trunk and upper limb.

Poststroke shoulder pain is a common complication. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of poststroke shoulder pain, with attention to the neuropathic component, and the relationship between poststroke shoulder pain and upper limb improvement in motor function, strength, disability, and quality of life after upper limb rehabilitation. This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare upper limb conventional or robotic rehabilitation on 224 patients enrolled in eight rehabilitation centers. We assessed poststroke shoulder pain (using the Numerical Rating Scale and the Douleur Neuropathique 4), and upper limb motor function, strength, disability, and quality of life at baseline (T0), after 30 rehabilitation sessions (T1), and three months after the end of rehabilitation (T2). A moderate/severe poststroke shoulder pain was reported by 28.9% of patients, while 19.6% of them showed a neuropathic component. At T0, the intensity of pain was higher in women and in patients with neglect syndrome, positively correlated with the time since stroke and disability and negatively correlated with motor function, strength, and the physical aspects of the quality of life.Moderate/severe pain and neuropathic component significantly reduced after both treatments and this reduction was maintained at T2. Finally, the intensity of pain at baseline was negatively correlated with the improvement of upper limb motor function. Poststroke shoulder pain negatively impact on motor performance, strength, disability, and physical aspects of the quality of life as well as on upper limb motor recovery; however, it can be reduced after a robotic or a conventional rehabilitation. Therefore, we suggest considering poststroke shoulder pain when planning the rehabilitation intervention.

The association between somatosensory impairments and outcome after stroke remains unclear. The aim of this study was to systematically review the available literature on the relationship between somatosensory impairments in the upper limb and outcome after stroke. The electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were systematically searched from inception until July 2013. Studies were included if adult patients with stroke (minimum n=10) were examined with reliable and valid measures of somatosensation in the upper limb to investigate the relationship with upper limb impairment, activity, and participation measures. Exclusion criteria included measures of somatosensation involving an overall score for upper and lower limb outcome and articles including only lower limb outcomes. Eligibility assessment, data extraction, and quality evaluation were completed by 2 independent reviewers. A cutoff score of ≥65% of the maximal quality score was used for further inclusion in this review. Six articles met all inclusion criteria. Two-point discrimination was shown to be predictive for upper limb dexterity, and somatosensory evoked potentials were shown to have predictive value in upper limb motor recovery. Proprioception was significantly correlated with perceived level of physical activity and social isolation and had some predictive value in functional movements of the upper limb. Finally, the combination of light touch and proprioception impairment was shown to be significantly related to upper limb motor recovery as well as handicap situations during activities of daily living. Heterogeneity of the included studies warrants caution when interpreting results. Large variation in results was found due to heterogeneity of the studies. However, somatosensory deficits were shown to have an important role in upper limb motor and functional performance after stroke.

Following stroke, upper limb impairment is common and frequently limits ability to perform everyday activities. Due to limited resources, current therapy levels are insufficient to optimise functional improvement. Robotic devices have potential to augment upper limb stroke rehabilitation, but knowledge regarding the optimal device features and intervention parameters is limited. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy of upper limb robotic rehabilitation compared with conventional rehabilitation, and to critically explore the device features and programme parameters that influence rehabilitation outcomes. Six electronic databases were searched for RCTs that compared dose-matched robotic versus conventional rehabilitation following stroke, and measured activity level changes in upper limb outcomes. The efficacy of robotic compared with conventional rehabilitation was evaluated using random-effects (I2 ≥ 50%) or fixed-effect (I2 < 50%) models. A systematic categorization of robotic device features and intervention parameters was conducted to facilitate subgroup analyses and meta-regression, enabling exploration of how these factors influence rehabilitation outcomes. The review included 54 studies, involving 2744 participants. Meta-analysis demonstrated that robotic rehabilitation had a small, statistically significant positive effect on upper limb capacity compared with conventional rehabilitation (SMD 0.14, 95% CI [0.02, 0.26]), however these gains were not maintained at follow-up (SMD 0.05, 95% CI [-0.13, 0.24]). No significant differences were found between robotic and conventional rehabilitation for ADL outcomes either post-treatment (SMD 0.04, 95% CI [- 0.05, 0.13]) or at follow-up (SMD 0.05, 95% CI [-0.13, 0.24]). Subgroup analyses provided crucial insights into the factors influencing robotic rehabilitation efficacy, revealing significant effects of device assistance (p = 0.0046), joints mobilized (p = 0.0133), degrees of freedom (p = 0.012), device laterality (p = 0.0048), and the number of devices used (p = 0.0001). The results suggest that robotic rehabilitation does not result in clinically meaningful improvement in either upper limb capacity or ADL performance. However, this study's novel subgroup analyses highlight specific device features and intervention parameters that significantly influence efficacy. These findings provide critical guidance for the design, implementation, and future research of robotic rehabilitation.

Stroke is a leading cause of motor disability worldwide. Upper limb rehabilitation is particularly challenging since approximately 35% of patients recover significant hand function after 6 months of the stroke's onset. Therefore, new therapies, especially those based on brain-computer interfaces (BCI) and robotic assistive devices, are currently under research. Electroencephalography (EEG) acquired brain rhythms in alpha and beta bands, during motor tasks, such as motor imagery/intention (MI), could provide insight of motor-related neural plasticity occurring during a BCI intervention. Hence, a longitudinal analysis of subacute stroke patients' brain rhythms during a BCI coupled to robotic device intervention was performed in this study. Data of 9 stroke patients were acquired across 12 sessions of the BCI intervention. Alpha and beta event-related desynchronization/synchronization (ERD/ERS) trends across sessions and their association with time since stroke onset and clinical upper extremity recovery were analyzed, using correlation and linear stepwise regression, respectively. More EEG channels presented significant ERD/ERS trends across sessions related with time since stroke onset, in beta, compared to alpha. Linear models implied a moderate relationship between alpha rhythms in frontal, temporal, and parietal areas with upper limb motor recovery and suggested a strong association between beta activity in frontal, central, and parietal regions with upper limb motor recovery. Higher association of beta with both time since stroke onset and upper limb motor recovery could be explained by beta relation with closed-loop communication between the sensorimotor cortex and the paralyzed upper limb, and alpha being probably more associated with motor learning mechanisms. The association between upper limb motor recovery and beta activations reinforces the hypothesis that broader regions of the cortex activate during movement tasks as a compensatory mechanism in stroke patients with severe motor impairment. Therefore, EEG across BCI interventions could provide valuable information for prognosis and BCI cortical activity targets.

Background The 2023 National Clinical Guidelines for Stroke recommend that stroke survivors with motor recovery goals should receive a minimum of 3 hours of rehabilitation 5/7 days a week (National Clinical Guideline for Stroke for the UK and Ireland, 2023). Schneider et al (2019) deem it feasible for stroke survivors to undertake extra upper limb practice (including group sessions) to support in achieving upper limb motor recovery goals. With staffing limitations, creative methods of intervention delivery must be adopted to enhance usual intervention sessions. Methods In an Irish hospital, a pilot project hypothesised the benefit of two one-hour Occupational Therapy functional upper limb group intervention sessions to support adherence to effective weekly dosage of upper limb motor recovery. An audit was completed on dosage of usual Occupational Therapy intervention, prior to group formation. Seven patients were identified with an average daily dosage of 35.4 minutes of usual intervention (5/7 days a week). Two one-hour group sessions were adopted in conjunction with usual therapy. Group intervention dosage was recorded. Patient self-reported satisfaction was obtained using a ten-point Likert scale. Results A total of twenty-nine patients, over 3 months, attended Occupational Therapy upper limb group interventions during an admission on the Acute Stroke Unit. The addition of two one-hour group intervention sessions supported an average actual increase in dosage of 113 extra minutes per week (36.15% increase). There was a 95% self-reported satisfaction rate among patients. Conclusion The addition of two one-hour Occupational Therapy functional upper limb groups increased upper limb motor recovery dosage by 113 minutes per week. Group intervention was a feasible tool that can be used on an Acute Stroke Unit in conjunction with usual therapy to support motor recovery guideline adherence and patient satisfaction. Despite these efforts, patients are not receiving the recommended daily intensity as highlighted by National Clinical Guidelines.

Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) is an innovative, non-invasive therapy that stimulates the contraction of paralyzed muscles in the upper limbs, promoting functional recovery. Several studies have demonstrated the efficacy of TEAS in restoring upper limb function. This study aims to evaluate the impact of TEAS on upper limb motor recovery after stroke. This study aims to evaluate the influence of TEAS on upper limb motor recovery after stroke and improve the quality of life in such patients. Eight databases were systematically searched from inception to 1st October 2024. Two independent reviewers conducted the screening and data extraction of the study. The primary outcome measure was the Fugl Meyer Assessment of the Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), which evaluates upper extremity motor function in stroke patients. Secondary outcomes included the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) for assessing spasticity and the Modified Barthel Index (MBI) to evaluate patients' abilities to perform activities of daily living. Data synthesis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 and Stata 14.0. The GRADE method was employed to assess the quality of evidence. A total of 16 trials involving 1,218 stroke patients were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that the TEAS significantly improved upper limb function (SMD = 1.70, 95CI% = 1.09 to 2.31, p < 0.00001, I 2 = 93%; low certainty of evidence), reduced spasticity (SMD = -1.18, 95CI% = -1.79 to -0.58, p < 0.00001, I 2 = 90%; very low certainty of evidence), and enhanced the ability to perform daily activities (SMD = 1.53, 95CI% = 0.85 to 2.20, p < 0.00001, I 2 = 95%; low certainty of evidence). Our results indicated that TEAS improved motor function and functional activities and reduced muscle tone in the upper limbs after stroke. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited strength of the evidence. High-quality, larger sample, multi-center studies are needed to validate these preliminary findings. This study was registered on PROSPERO with registration number CRD42024592509. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024592509.

People who have survived stroke may have motor and cognitive impairments. High dose of motor rehabilitation was found to provide clinically relevant improvement to upper limb (UL) motor function. Besides, mounting evidence suggests that clinical, neural, and neurophysiological features are associated with spontaneous recovery. However, the association between these features and rehabilitation-induced, rather than spontaneous, recovery has never been fully investigated. The objective was to explore the association between rehabilitation dose and UL motor outcome after stroke, as well as to identify which variables can be considered potential candidate predictors of motor recovery. People who survived stroke were assessed before and after a period of rehabilitation using motor, cognitive, neuroanatomical, and neurophysiological measures. We investigated the association between dose of rehabilitation and UL response (ie, Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper extremity [FMA-UE]), using ordinary least squares regression as the primary analysis. To obtain unbiased estimates, adjusting covariates were selected using a directed acyclic graph. Baseline FMA-UE was the only factor associated with motor recovery (b = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.83 to 1.15 points). Attention emerged as a confounder of the association between rehabilitation and final FMA-UE (b = 5.5; 95% CI = -0.8 to 11.9 points), influencing both rehabilitation and UL response. Preserved attention in people who have survived stroke might lead to greater UL motor recovery, albeit estimates have high levels of variability. Moreover, the increase in the dose of rehabilitation can lead to 5.5 points improvement on the FMA-UE, a nonsignificant but potentially meaningful finding. The approach described here discloses a new framework for investigating the effect of rehabilitation treatment as a potential driver of recovery. Attentional resources could play a key role in UL motor recovery. There is a potential association between amount of UL recovery and dose of rehabilitation delivered, needing further exploration. Preserved attention and rehabilitation dose are candidate predictors of UL motor recovery.

BackgroundImproving upper limb (UL) motor recovery after stroke represents a major clinical and scientific goal. We aim to complete three systematic reviews to estimate the (1) association between time to start of UL therapy and motor recovery, (2) relative efficacy of different UL therapy approaches post-stroke and (3) cost-effectiveness of UL therapy interventions.MethodsWe have designed a systematic review protocol to address three systematic review questions that were each registered with PROSPERO. The search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials. We will include randomised controlled trials, non-randomised clinical trials, before-after studies and observational studies of adult stroke survivors with an average stroke onset < 6 months, undergoing hospital-based therapy to improve UL function. Eligible interventions will aim to promote UL functional recovery. Two reviewers will independently screen, select and extract data. Study risk of bias will be appraised using appropriate tools. Clinical measures of motor recovery will be investigated (primary measure Fugl Meyer UL assessment), as well as measures of health-related quality of life (primary measure EQ-5D) and all cost-effectiveness analyses completed. Secondary outcomes include therapy dose (minutes, weeks, repetitions as available) and safety (i.e. adverse events, serious adverse events). A narrative synthesis will describe quality and content of the evidence. If feasible, we will conduct random effects meta-analyses where appropriate.DiscussionWe anticipate the findings of this review will increase our understanding of UL therapy and inform the generation of novel, data-driven hypotheses for future UL therapy research post-stroke.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO, http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018019367, http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018111629, http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018111628.

Orthoses have shown potential in addressing upper limb spasticity in stroke survivors; however, their influence on motor recovery remains controversial. This study aimed to examine the effects of a wearable hand orthosis on spasticity, motor recovery of both upper and lower limbs, balance, and activities of daily living in stroke. Randomized controlled trial. Inpatient rehabilitation department. Fifty-one stroke survivors with hemiplegia were randomly assigned to either an experimental group (n = 26) or a control group (n = 25). Both groups underwent a 4-week conventional rehabilitation program. Participants in the experimental group engaged in a self-directed training program utilizing a wearable hand orthosis for 5h daily, whereas the control group followed the identical regimen without the use of the orthosis. Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) for spasticity, Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper and lower extremities (FMA-UE & FMA-LE), Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and Barthel Index (BI). The experimental group showed greater improvements in FMA-UE (difference = 4.37, P = 0.022), BBS (difference = 12.37, P < 0.001), and BI (difference = 17.65, P < 0.001) compared to the control group. No significant differences were found in MAS (P = 0.654) or FMA-LE (P = 0.495). A stepwise multiple linear regression analysis revealed that improvement in FMA-UE was a significant predictor of BBS recovery in the experimental group (r 2 = 0.207, P = 0.022). The use of a wearable hand orthosis in self-directed training significantly improved upper limb motor recovery, balance, and ADL abilities in stroke survivors. The observed correlation between upper limb recovery and balance improvement indicates the potential of this orthosis to facilitate comprehensive rehabilitation.

Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) is a promising noninvasive therapy to restore the excitability of the cortex, and subsequently improve the function of the upper extremities. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of iTBS in restoring upper limb function and modulating cortical excitability. We aimed to evaluate the effects of iTBS on upper limb motor recovery after stroke. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the influence of intermittent theta-burst stimulation on upper limb motor recovery and improve the quality of life. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CBM, including only English studies, to identify studies that investigated the effects of iTBS on upper limb recovery, compared with sham iTBS used in control groups. Effect size was reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) or weighted mean difference (WMD). Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that when compared to the control group, the iTBS group had a significant difference in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) (WMD: 3.20, 95% CI: 1.42 to 4.97; WMD: 3.72, 95% CI: 2.13 to 5.30, respectively). In addition, there was also a significant improvement in the modified Ashworth scale (MAS) compared to the sham group (WMD: -0.56; 95% CI: -0.85 to -0.28). More evidence is still needed to confirm the effect of Barthel Index (BI) scores after interventions. However, no significant effect was found for the assessment of Motor Evoked Potential (MEP) amplitude and MEP latency (SMD: 0.35; 95% CI: -0.21 to 0.90; SMD: 0.35, 95% CI: -0.18 to 0.87; SMD: 0.03, 95% CI: -0.49 to 0.55; respectively). Our results showed that iTBS significantly improved motor impairment, functional activities, and reduced muscle tone of upper limbs, thereby increasing the ability to perform Activities of Daily Living (ADL) in stroke patients, while there were no significant differences in MEPs. In conclusion, iTBS is a promising non-invasive brain stimulation as an adjunct to therapy and enhances the therapeutic effect of conventional physical therapy. In the future, more randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes, high quality, and follow-up are necessary to explore the neurophysiological effects. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023392739.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of the mirror therapy program on upper-limb motor recovery and motor function in patients with acute stroke. Twenty-six patients who had an acute stroke within 6 mos of study commencement were assigned to the experimental group (n = 13) or the control group (n = 13). Both experimental and control group members participated in a standard rehabilitation program, but only the experimental group members additionally participated in mirror therapy program, for 25 mins twice a day, five times a week, for 4 wks. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Brunnstrom motor recovery stage, and Manual Function Test were used to assess changes in upper-limb motor recovery and motor function after intervention. In upper-limb motor recovery, the scores of Fugl-Meyer Assessment (by shoulder/elbow/forearm items, 9.54 vs. 4.61; wrist items, 2.76 vs. 1.07; hand items, 4.43 vs. 1.46, respectively) and Brunnstrom stages for upper limb and hand (by 1.77 vs. 0.69 and 1.92 vs. 0.50, respectively) were improved more in the experimental group than in the control group (P < 0.05). In upper-limb motor function, the Manual Function Test score (by shoulder item, 5.00 vs. 2.23; hand item, 5.07 vs. 0.46, respectively) was significantly increased in the experimental group compared with the control group (P < 0.01). No significant differences were found between the groups for the coordination items in Fugl-Meyer Assessment. This study confirms that mirror therapy program is an effective intervention for upper-limb motor recovery and motor function improvement in acute stroke patients. Additional research on mirror therapy program components, intensity, application time, and duration could result in it being used as a standardized form of hand rehabilitation in clinics and homes.