<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[TBI Rehabilitation]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[https://tbirehabilitation.wordpress.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Kostas Pantremenos]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://tbirehabilitation.wordpress.com/author/onganalop/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[[ARTICLE] A new lower limb portable exoskeleton for gait assistance in neurological patients: a proof of concept study &#8211; Full&nbsp;Text]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<section lang="en" aria-labelledby="Abs1">
<div id="Abs1-section" class="c-article-section">
<h2 id="Abs1" class="c-article-section__title js-section-title js-c-reading-companion-sections-item">Abstract</h2>
<div id="Abs1-content" class="c-article-section__content">
<h3 class="c-article__sub-heading">Background</h3>
<p>Few portable exoskeletons following the assist-as-needed concept have been developed for patients with neurological disorders. Thus, the main objectives of this proof-of-concept study were 1) to explore the safety and feasibility of an exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation in stroke and multiple sclerosis patients, 2) to test different algorithms for gait assistance and measure the resulting gait changes and 3) to evaluate the user’s perception of the device.</p>
<h3 class="c-article__sub-heading">Methods</h3>
<p>A cross-sectional study was conducted. Five patients were recruited (4 patients with stroke and 1 with multiple sclerosis). A robotic, one-degree-of-freedom, portable lower limb exoskeleton known as the Marsi Active Knee (MAK) was designed. Three control modes (the Zero Force Control mode, Mode 1 and Mode 3) were implemented. Spatiotemporal gait parameters were measured by the 10-m walking test (10MWT), the Gait Assessment and Intervention Tool (G.A.I.T.) and Tinetti Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment (gait subscale) before and after the trials. A modified QUEST 2.0 questionnaire was administered to determine each participant’s opinion about the exoskeleton. The data acquired by the MAK sensors were normalized to a gait cycle, and adverse effects were recorded.</p>
<h3 class="c-article__sub-heading">Results</h3>
<p>The MAK exoskeleton was used successfully without any adverse effects. Better outcomes were obtained in the 10MWT and G.A.I.T. when Mode 3 was applied compared with not wearing the device at all. In 2 participants, Mode 3 worsened the results. Additionally, Mode 3 seemed to improve the 10MWT and G.A.I.T. outcomes to a greater extent than Mode 1. The overall score for the user perception of the device was 2.8 ± 0.4 95% CI.</p>
<h3 class="c-article__sub-heading">Conclusions</h3>
<p>The MAK exoskeleton seems to afford positive preliminary results regarding safety, feasibility, and user acceptance. The efficacy of the MAK should be studied in future studies, and more advanced improvements in safety must be implemented.</p>
</div>
</div>
</section>
<section aria-labelledby="Sec1">
<div id="Sec1-section" class="c-article-section">
<h2 id="Sec1" class="c-article-section__title js-section-title js-c-reading-companion-sections-item">Background</h2>
<div id="Sec1-content" class="c-article-section__content">
<p>In 2015, neurological disorders accounted for 16.8% of the total deaths worldwide and 10.2% of the global disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e681" title="Feigin VL, Abajobir AA, Abate KH, Abd-Allah F, Abdulle AM, Abera SF, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders during 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2015. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16(11):877–97." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR1" aria-label="Reference 1">1</a>]. These numbers have increased since 1990 due to growing size of the population and aging, and they are expected to continue to increase. By 2030, it is estimated that the population affected by neurological diseases will include as many as 1.136 million people [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e684" title="World Health Organization. Neurological disorders: public health challenges. 2005;." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR2" aria-label="Reference 2">2</a>]. In Spain, between 6.7–7.5 million people are affected by neurological diseases [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e687" title="Oliva J, Osuna R, Jorgensen N. Estimación de los costes de los cuidados informales asociados a enfermedades neurológicas de alta prevalencia en España. Pharmacoecon Spanish Res Artic. 2007;4(3):83–96." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR3" aria-label="Reference 3">3</a>]. The total direct and indirect cost related to neurological diseases was 10.9 million euros in 2004 in this country [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e690" title="Oliva J, Osuna R, Jorgensen N. Estimación de los costes de los cuidados informales asociados a enfermedades neurológicas de alta prevalencia en España. Pharmacoecon Spanish Res Artic. 2007;4(3):83–96." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR3" aria-label="Reference 3">3</a>, <a id="ref-link-section-d37703e693" title="Sánchez C. Impacto sociosanitario de las enfermedades neurológicas en España. Madrid: Fundación Española de Enfermedades Neurológicas (FEEN); 2006." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR4" aria-label="Reference 4">4</a>].</p>
<p>Neurological diseases cause functional disturbances, including gait disabilities, that affect patients’ ability to perform activities of daily living [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e699" title="Feigin VL, Abajobir AA, Abate KH, Abd-Allah F, Abdulle AM, Abera SF, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders during 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2015. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16(11):877–97." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR1" aria-label="Reference 1">1</a>]. Between 50 and 60% of patients with stroke still have some degree of motor impairment after a conventional rehabilitation period [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e702" title="Schaechter JD. Motor rehabilitation and brain plasticity after hemiparetic stroke. Prog Neurobiol. 2004;73(1):61–72." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR5" aria-label="Reference 5">5</a>]. In multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, gait impairment is a major contributor to social, personal and economic burdens [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e705" title="Pike J, Jones E, Rajagopalan K, Piercy J, Anderson P. Social and economic burden of walking and mobility problems in multiple sclerosis. BMC Neurol. 2012;12(1):1 Available from: BMC Neurology." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR6" aria-label="Reference 6">6</a>]. Thus, gait impairment is one of the main problems in patients with stroke or MS [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e708" title="LaRocca NG. Impact of walking impairment in multiple sclerosis. Patient. 2011;4(3):189–201 Available from: 
                  http://link.springer.com/10.2165/11591150-000000000-00000

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR7" aria-label="Reference 7">7</a>, <a id="ref-link-section-d37703e711" title="Lord SE, McPherson K, McNaughton HK, Rochester L, Weatherall M. Community ambulation after stroke: how important and obtainable is it and what measures appear predictive? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(2):234–9." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR8" aria-label="Reference 8">8</a>].</p>
<p>Due to the extent that gait impairment affects patients, gait rehabilitation is considered a key aspect of physical rehabilitation [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e717" title="Dobkin BH. Rehabilitation after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(16):1677–84." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR9">9</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e717_1" title="Morone G, Masiero S, Werner C, Paolucci S. Advances in neuromotor stroke rehabilitation. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:236043." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR10">10</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e717_2" title="Veerbeek JM, Van Wegen E, Van Peppen R, Van Der Wees PJ, Hendriks E, Rietberg M, et al. What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e87987." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR11">11</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e717_3" title="Mikołajewska E. The value of the NDT-Bobath method in post-stroke gait training. Adv Clin Exp Med. 22(2):261–72 Available from: 
                  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23709383

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR12">12</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e717_4" title="Van Der Linden ML, Hooper JE, Cowan P, Weller BB, Mercer TH. Habitual functional electrical stimulation therapy improves gait kinematics and walking performance, but not patient-reported functional outcomes, of people with multiple sclerosis who present with foot-drop. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e103368." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR13">13</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e720" title="Donzé C. Update on rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. Press Med. 2015;44(4):e169–76 Available from: 
                  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lpm.2014.10.019

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR14" aria-label="Reference 14">14</a>]. Currently, there is a growing interest in determining which characteristics of training should be involve in gait rehabilitation, as therapies are currently based on repetitive and intensive training and functional and feedback-based interventions [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e723" title="Belda-Lois JM, Mena-Del Horno S, Bermejo-Bosch I, Moreno JC, Pons JL, Farina D, et al. Rehabilitation of gait after stroke: A review towards a top-down approach. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2011;8(1):66 Available from: 
                  http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/8/1/66

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR15">15</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e723_1" title="Albert SJ, Kesselring J. Neurorehabilitation of stroke. J Neurol. 2012;259(5):817–32 Available from: 
                  http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00415-011-6247-y

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR16">16</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e726" title="Langhorne P, Bernhardt J, Kwakkel G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet. 2011;377(9778):1693–702 Available from: 
                  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60325-5

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR17" aria-label="Reference 17">17</a>]. These characteristics are aligned with the use of exoskeletons in gait rehabilitation. In recent years, this technology has been widely used in stroke and MS studies [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e729" title="Louie DR, Eng JJ. Powered robotic exoskeletons in post-stroke rehabilitation of gait: a scoping review. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016;13(1):1–10 Available from: 
                  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-016-0162-5

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR18">18</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e729_1" title="Tsukahara A, Kawanishi R, Hasegawa Y, Sankai Y. Sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transfer support for complete paraplegic patients with robot suit HAL. Adv Robot. 2010;24(11):1615–38." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR19">19</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e729_2" title="Mehrholz J, Pohl M. Electromechanical-assisted gait training after stroke: a systematic review comparing end-effector and exoskeleton devices. J Rehabil Med. 2012;44(3):193–9." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR20">20</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e729_3" title="Schwartz I, Meiner Z. Robotic-assisted gait training in neurological patients: who may benefit? Ann Biomed Eng. 2015;43(5):1260–9 Available from: 
                  http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10439-015-1283-x

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR21">21</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e729_4" title="Hesse S, Mehrholz J, Werner C. Robot-assisted upper and lower limb rehabilitation after stroke: walking and arm/hand function. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2008;105(7):330–6." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR22">22</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e729_5" title="Straudi S, Fanciullacci C, Martinuzzi C, Pavarelli C, Rossi B, Chisari C, et al. The effects of robot-assisted gait training in progressive multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. Mult Scler J. 2016;22(3):373–84 Available from: 
                  http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1352458515620933

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR23">23</a>,<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e733" title="Ueba T, Hamada O, Ogata T, Inoue T, Shiota E, Sankai Y. Feasibility and safety of acute phase rehabilitation after stroke using the hybrid assistive limb robot suit. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2013;53(287):287–90 Available from: 
                  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23708218

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR24" aria-label="Reference 24">24</a>].</p>
<p>To the best of our knowledge, few portable exoskeletons that are lightweight and have the capability to execute or modify gait assistance algorithms have been developed, and a high degree of customization can be allowed by following the <i>assist-as-needed</i> concept [<a id="ref-link-section-d37703e742" title="Srivastava S, Kao PC. Robotic assist-as-needed as an alternative to therapist-assisted gait rehabilitation. Int J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;4(5):6072–8 Available from: 
                  https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/robotic-assistasneeded-as-an-alternative-to-therapistassisted-gaitrehabilitation-2329-9096-1000370.php?aid=80441

                ." href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#ref-CR25" aria-label="Reference 25">25</a>] for gait assistance in stroke and MS patients. The exoskeleton evaluated in this study is a single-limb exoskeleton with actuation at the knee level (Fig. <a href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6#Fig1">1</a>). Thus, the main objectives of this study were 1) to explore the safety and feasibility of the exoskeleton developed by the research team for gait rehabilitation in stroke and MS patients as a proof of concept, 2) to test different algorithms for gait assistance and measure the resulting gait changes and 3) to evaluate the user’s perception of the device.</p>
<div style="width: 695px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img src="https://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs12984-020-00690-6/MediaObjects/12984_2020_690_Fig1_HTML.png" alt="figure1" width="685" height="738" /><p class="wp-caption-text"><b id="Fig1" class="c-article-section__figure-caption">Fig. 1 </b>Marsi Active Knee (MAK) exoskeleton, by Marsi Bionics</p></div>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
</div>
</div>
</section>
<p>[&#8230;]</p>
<p>Continue &#8212;-&gt; <a href="https://jneuroengrehab.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12984-020-00690-6">A new lower limb portable exoskeleton for gait assistance in neurological patients: a proof of concept study | Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation | Full Text</a></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></html><thumbnail_url><![CDATA[https://i0.wp.com/media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs12984-020-00690-6/MediaObjects/12984_2020_690_Fig1_HTML.png?fit=440%2C330&ssl=1]]></thumbnail_url><thumbnail_width><![CDATA[306]]></thumbnail_width><thumbnail_height><![CDATA[330]]></thumbnail_height></oembed>