Motions or muscles? Some behavioral factors underlying robotic assistance of motor recovery.
Robotics and related technologies have begun to realize their promise to improve the delivery of rehabilitation therapy. However, the mechanism by which they enhance recovery remains unclear. Ultimately, recovery depends on biology, yet the details of the recovery process remain largely unknown; a deeper understanding is important to accelerate refinements of robotic therapy or suggest new approaches. Fortunately, robots provide an excellent instrument platform from which to study recovery at the behavioral level. This article reviews some initial insights about the process of upper-limb behavioral recovery that have emerged from our work. Evidence to date suggests that the form of therapy may be more important than its intensity: muscle strengthening offers no advantage over movement training. Passive movement is insufficient; active participation is required. Progressive training based on measures of movement coordination yields substantially improved outcomes. Together these results indicate that movement coordination rather than muscle activation may be the most appropriate focus for robotic therapy.
Hogan
Neville
N
Newman Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. neville@mit.edu
Krebs
Hermano I
HI
Rohrer
Brandon
B
Palazzolo
Jerome J
JJ
Dipietro
Laura
L
Fasoli
Susan E
SE
Stein
Joel
J
Hughes
Richard
R
Frontera
Walter R
WR
Lynch
Daniel
D
Volpe
Bruce T
BT
D001519:Behavior / Q000502:physiology; D005081:Exercise Therapy; D006801:Humans; D009068:Movement; D018908:Muscle Weakness / Q000209:etiology* / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D012371:Robotics; D020521:Stroke / Q000150:complications*; D000071939:Stroke Rehabilitation