A review of methods for achieving upper limb movement following spinal cord injury through hybrid muscle stimulation and robotic assistance
- PMID: 32145251
- DOI: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2020.113274
A review of methods for achieving upper limb movement following spinal cord injury through hybrid muscle stimulation and robotic assistance
Abstract
Individuals with tetraplegia, typically attributed to spinal cord injuries (SCI) at the cervical level, experience significant health care costs and loss of independence due to their limited reaching and grasping capabilities. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is a promising intervention to restore arm and hand function because it activates a person's own paralyzed muscles; however, NMES sometimes lacks the accuracy and repeatability necessary to position the limb for functional tasks, and repeated muscle stimulation can lead to fatigue. Robotic devices have the potential to restore function when used as assistive devices to supplement or replace limited or lost function of the upper limb following SCI. Unfortunately, most robotic solutions are bulky or require significant power to operate, limiting their applicability to restore functional independence in a home environment. Combining NMES and robotic support systems into a single hybrid neuroprosthesis is compelling, since the robotic device can supplement the action of the muscles and improve repeatability and accuracy. Research groups have begun to explore applications of movement assistance for individuals with spinal cord injury using these technologies in concert. In this review, we present the state of the art in hybrid NMES-orthotic systems for upper limb movement restoration following spinal cord injury, and suggest areas for emphasis necessary to move the field forward. Currently, NMES-robotic systems use either surface or implanted electrodes to stimulate muscles, with rigid robotic supports holding the limb against gravity, or providing assistance in reaching movements. Usability of such systems outside of the lab or clinic is limited due to the complexity of both the mechanical components, stimulation systems, and human-machine interfaces. Assessment of system and participant performance is not reported in a standardized way. Future directions should address wearability through improvements in component technologies and user interfaces. Further, increased integration of the control action between NMES and robotic subsystems to reanimate the limb should be pursued. Standardized reporting of system performance and expanded clinical assessments of these systems are also needed. All of these advancements are critical to facilitate translation from lab to home.
Keywords: Exoskeletons; Functional electrical stimulation; Hybrid systems; Neuromuscular electrical stimulation; Neuroprosthesis; Rehabilitation robotics; Shared control; Spinal cord injury.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Hybrid FES-robot cooperative control of ambulatory gait rehabilitation exoskeleton.J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Mar 4;11:27. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-11-27. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014. PMID: 24594302 Free PMC article.
-
A muscle-driven approach to restore stepping with an exoskeleton for individuals with paraplegia.J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017 May 30;14(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s12984-017-0258-6. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017. PMID: 28558835 Free PMC article.
-
Restoration of reaching and grasping movements through brain-controlled muscle stimulation in a person with tetraplegia: a proof-of-concept demonstration.Lancet. 2017 May 6;389(10081):1821-1830. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30601-3. Epub 2017 Mar 28. Lancet. 2017. PMID: 28363483 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Effects of training on upper limb function after cervical spinal cord injury: a systematic review.Clin Rehabil. 2015 Jan;29(1):3-13. doi: 10.1177/0269215514536411. Epub 2014 Jun 4. Clin Rehabil. 2015. PMID: 25575932 Review.
-
Exoskeletons for Personal Use After Spinal Cord Injury.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Feb;102(2):331-337. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2019.05.028. Epub 2019 Jun 20. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021. PMID: 31228407 Review.
Cited by
-
Hybrid FES-exoskeleton control: Using MPC to distribute actuation for elbow and wrist movements.Front Neurorobot. 2023 Apr 6;17:1127783. doi: 10.3389/fnbot.2023.1127783. eCollection 2023. Front Neurorobot. 2023. PMID: 37091069 Free PMC article.
-
When Spinal Neuromodulation Meets Sensorimotor Rehabilitation: Lessons Learned From Animal Models to Regain Manual Dexterity After a Spinal Cord Injury.Front Rehabil Sci. 2021 Dec 7;2:755963. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2021.755963. eCollection 2021. Front Rehabil Sci. 2021. PMID: 36188826 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Controlling an effector with eye movements: The effect of entangled sensory and motor responsibilities.PLoS One. 2022 Feb 3;17(2):e0263440. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263440. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35113943 Free PMC article.
-
A new modular neuroprosthesis suitable for hybrid FES-robot applications and tailored assistance.J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2024 Sep 4;21(1):153. doi: 10.1186/s12984-024-01450-6. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2024. PMID: 39232831 Free PMC article.
-
Biomimetic Exogenous "Tissue Batteries" as Artificial Power Sources for Implantable Bioelectronic Devices Manufacturing.Adv Sci (Weinh). 2024 Mar;11(11):e2307369. doi: 10.1002/advs.202307369. Epub 2024 Jan 9. Adv Sci (Weinh). 2024. PMID: 38196276 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous