Выпуск №2-84, 2018

Роботизированные устройства в нейрореабилитации: состояние вопроса

Посмотреть статью (PDF файл для скачивания)



XML файл для скачивания

1 Белова А.Н., 1 Борзиков В.В., 1 Кузнецов А.Н., 1 Рукина Н.Н.

1 Федеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Приволжский исследовательский медицинский университет» Министерства здравоохранения Российской Федерации, Нижний Новгород, Россия


РЕЗЮМЕ

Использование роботизированных устройств (РУ) в комбинации с традиционной кинезотерапией является перспективным направлением реабилитации неврологических пациентов, имеющих выраженные двигательные нарушения. В статье рассмотрены классификации РУ, используемых в целях восстановительного лечения, даны краткие сведения о тех средствах робототехники, которые производятся в настоящее время. Представлены сведенияо преимуществах и рисках робот-ассистируемой терапии в сравнении с традиционными способами нейрореабилитации. Приведены результаты метаанализов и рандомизированных исследований, посвященных клиническойэффективности применения РУ, рассмотрены вопрос экономической эффективности робототерапии. Особоевнимание уделено этическим аспектам разработки новых реабилитационных РУ и требованиям к «идеальному»нейрореабилитационному роботу.


КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: нейрореабилитация, роботизированные устройства, экзоскелеты



Список литературы:

  1. Iosa M., Morone G., Cherubini A., Paolucci S. The Three Laws of Neurorobotics: A Review on What Neurorehabilitation Robots Should Do for Patients and Clinicians //J. Med. Biol. Eng. 2016. DOI 10.1007/s40846-016-0115-2.
  2. Booker K.M. Historical dictionary of science fiction in literature. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. - 2015.
  3. Xie Ming. Fundamental of robotics: Linking perception to action. Singapore: World Scientific //Machine Perception and Artificial Intelligence, -2003. - vol. 54. - 716 p.
  4. Gosine R.G., Harwin W.S., Furby L.J., & Jackson R.D. An intelligent end-effector for a rehabilitation robot. //Journal of Medical Engineering & Technology. 1989; 13(1-2), 37-43.
  5. Krebs H.I., Hogan N., Aisen M.L., & Volpe B.T. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation. //IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering, 1998;6(1), рр.75-87.
  6. Aisen M.L., Krebs H.I., Hogan N., McDowell F., Volpe B.T. The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. //Archives of Neurology. - 1997. - 54(4). - P. 443-446.
  7. Hesse S., Schmidt, H. Werner, C. & Bardeleben, A. Upper and lower extremity robotic devices for rehabilitation and for studying motor control. //Current Opinion in Neurology, 2003;16(6),705-710.
  8. Veneman J.F. Kruidhof, R. Hekman, E.E. Ekkelenkamp, R. Van Asseldonk, E.H. & Van der Kooij, H. Design and evaluation of the LOPES exoskeleton robot for interactive gait rehabilitation. //IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2007; 15(3), 379-386.
  9. Iosa M., Morone G., Fusco A., Bragoni, M. Coiro, P., Multari M., et al. Seven capital devices for the future of stroke rehabilitation. //Stroke Research & Treatment, 2012, 187965.
  10. Morone G., Rosati G., Masiero S., Poli P. Robotic Technologies and Rehabilitation: New Tools for Stroke Patients’ Therapy. BioMed Research International. 2013; Article ID 153872, 8 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/153872
  11. Fazekas G., Horvath M., Toth A. A novel robot training system designed to supplement upper limb physiotherapy of patients with spastic hemiparesis. //Int J Rehabil Res. 2006;29:251-254.
  12. Huang V.S., Krakauer J.W. Robotic neurorehabilitation: a computational motor learning perspective // J. Neuroeng Rehabil. - 2009. -Vol.6. - P. 5.
  13. Kalyan K. Mankala, Sai K. Banala, and Sunil K. Agrawal. Novel swing-assist un-motorized exoskeletons for gait training //J. Neuroeng. Reha-bil. - 2009. - Vol. 6. - P. 24
  14. Воробьев А. А., Андрющенко Ф.А., Засыпкина О.А., Соловьева И.О., Кривоножкина П.С., Поздняков А.М. Терминология и классификация экзоскелетов // Вестник Волгму. - 2015. - №3 (55). - С.71-77.
  15. Calabrd R.S, Cacciola A, Berte F, Manuli A, Leo A, Bramanti A, Naro A, Milardi D, Bramanti P. Robotic gait rehabilitation and substitution devices in neurological disorders: where are we now? // Neurol Sci. 2016. Apr. 37(4). P. 503-14. doi: 10.1007/s10072-016-2474-4. Epub 2016 Jan 18.
  16. Brewer L, Horgan F, Hickey A, Williams D. Stroke rehabilitation: recent advances and future therapies. // QJM. - 2013. - 106(1). - P. 11-25.
  17. Sabel B.A., Matzke S., Prilloff S. Special issues in brain plasticity, repair and rehabilitation: 20 years of a publishing strategy //Restor. Neurol. Neurosci. - 2010.- Vol.28, №6.-P. 719-728.
  18. Schwartz I Sajin A, MD, Fisher I. The Effectiveness of Locomotor Therapy Using Robotic-Assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial // Medical Association Journal.- 2009.-Vol. 1.- P. 516-523.
  19. Waldner A., Tomelleri C., Hesse S. Transfer of scientific concepts to clinical practice: recent robot assisted training studies // Funct. Neurol.- 2009.-.№10.- P. 173-177.
  20. Lim P.A., Tow A.M. Recovery and regeneration after spinal cord injury: a review and summary of recent literature //Ann. Acad. Med. Singapore, 2007; Jan.; 36 (1): 49-57.
  21. Dietz V., Nef, T., & Rymer W.Z. Neurorehabilitation technology. 2012; London, UK: Springer.
  22. Belda-Lois J.M., Mena-del Horno, S., Bermejo-Bosch, I., Moreno, J. C., Pons, J. L., Farina, D., et al. Rehabilitation of gait after stroke: A review towards a top-down approach. //Journal of Neuroengineering & Rehabilitation. - 2011. - №8 (1): 66.
  23. Нурманова Ш.А. Роботизированная механизированная нейрореабилитация. //Нейрохирургия и неврология Казахстана. - 2013. -№1 (30).
  24. Datteri E. Predicting the long-term effects of humanrobot interaction: A reflection on responsibility in medical robotics. // Science and Engineering Ethics. 2013;19(1), 139-160.
  25. Regnaux J.P., Saremi K., Marehbian J., Bussel B., & Dobkin B.H. An accelerometry-based comparison of 2 robotic assistive devices for treadmill training of gait. //Neurorehabilitation& Neural Repair, 2008; 22(4), 348-354.
  26. Delussu A.S., Morone G., Iosa M., Bragoni M. Traballesi M. & Paolucci, S. Physiological responses and energy cost of walking on the Gait Trainer with and without body weight support in subacute stroke patients. // Journal of Neuroengineering &Rehabilitation. 2014; 11, 54.
  27. Van Der Loos, H.F. M., & Reinkensmeyer, D.J. (2008). Rehabilitation and health care robotics. In B. Siciliano & O.Khatib (Eds.), Springer Handbook of Robotics. - Berlin: Springer, 2008. -pp.1223-1251.
  28. Takahashi C.D., Der-Yeghiaian L., LeV., Motiwala R.R., Cramer S.C. Robot-based hand motor therapy after stroke. Brain. 2008; 131:425-437.
  29. Neuhaus P.D., Noorden J.H., Craig T.J., Torres T., Kirschbaum J., Pratt J.E. Design and evaluation of Mina: A robotic orthosis for paraplegics; Proc IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot; 2011; pp. 870-877. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICORR.2011.5975468
  30. Даминов В.Д., Рыбалко Н.В., Горохова И.Г., Короткова И.С., Кузнецов А.Н. Реабилитация больных в остром периоде ишемического инсульта с применением роботизированной системы «Erigo»// Вестник восстановительной медицины.- 2008.- № 6.- C.50-53.
  31. 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: 1615-1638. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/016918610X512622.
  32. Otaka E., Otaka Y., Kasuga S., Nishimoto A., Yamazaki K., Kawakami M., Ushiba J., Liu M. Clinical usefulness and validity of robotic measures of reaching movement in hemiparetic stroke patients. //J. Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015; Aug 12; 12:66. doi: 10.1186/s12984-015-0059-8.
  33. Черникова Л.А., Демидова А.Е., Домашенко М.А. Эффект применения роботизированных устройств («Эриго» и «Локомат») в ранние сроки после ишемического инсульта // Вестник Восстановительной медицины. - 2008. - № 5. - С. 73-75.
  34. Зимина Е.В. Медицинская реабилитация больных с применением роботизированной реконструкции ходьбы в первые месяцы после травмы спинного мозга: автореф. дис. ...канд. биол. наук. - Москва, 2010. - 40 с.
  35. Сидякина И.В. Эффективность и безопасность ранней аппаратной вертикализации при тяжелом и крайне тяжелом инсульте//Вестник восстановительной медицины. - 2011. - №4. - С. 2-5.
  36. Романенкова Ю.С., Кузьминова Т.И., Кызымко М.И., Сафоничева М.А. Нейрореабилитация пациентов с инсультом в вертебробазилярном бассейне при помощи роботизированных аппаратов. // Восстановительная медицина, спортивная медицина, лечебная физкультура, курортология и физиотерапия. - 2016. - № 8 (30).
  37. Nam K.Y., Kim H.J., Kwon B.S., Park J.W., Lee H.J., Yoo A. Robot-assisted gait training (Lokomat) improves walking function and activity in people with spinal cord injury: a systematic review. //J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017; Mar 23;14(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s12984-017-0232-3.
  38. Chisholm A.E., Alamro R.A., Williams A.M., Lam T. Overground vs. treadmill-based robotic gait training to improve seated balance in people with motor-complete spinal cord injury: a case report. // J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017; Apr 11;14(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s12984-017-0236-z.Asimov, I. I Robot. / New York, NY: Gnome Press, 1951.
  39. Hidler J., Nichols D., Pelliccio M., Brady K., Campbell D.D., Kahn J.H., et al. Multicenter randomized clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of the Lokomat in subacute stroke. //Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 2009;23, 5-13.
  40. Husemann B., MQller F., Krewer C., Heller S., Koenig E. Effects of locomotion training with assistance of a robot-driven gait orthosis in hemiparetic patients after stroke // Stroke, 2007; 38: 349-DOI:10.1161/01.STR.0000254607.48765.cb.
  41. Lo A.C., Guarino P.D., Richards L.G., Haselkorn J.K., Wittenberg G F., & Federman, D.G. Robot-assisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. //The New England Journal of Medicine, 2010;362(19), 1772-1783.
  42. Klamroth-Marganska V., Blanco J., Campen K., Curt A., Dietz V., Ettlin T., et al. Three-dimensional, taskspecific robot therapy of the arm after stroke: A multicentre,parallel-group randomised trial. //Lancet Neurology. 2014;13(2),159-166.
  43. Mehrholz J., Platz T., Kugler J., Pohl M. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving arm function and activities of daily living after stroke. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2008; 8(4):CD006876.
  44. Mehrholz J., Pohl M., Elsner, B. Treadmill training and body weight support for walking after stroke. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 1:CD002840.
  45. Mehrholz J., Pohl M., Platz T., Kugler J., Elsner B. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015, Nov 7;(11):CD006876. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006876. pub4.
  46. Mehrholz J., Hadrich A., Platz T., Kugler J., Pohl M. Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving generic activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2012; 6:CD006876.
  47. Zhang C., Li-Tsang C.W., Au R.K. Robotic approaches for the rehabilitation of upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Int J. Rehabil Res. 2017 Mar; 40(1):19-28. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000204.
  48. Veerbeek J.M., Langbroek-Amersfoort A.C., van Wegen E.E., Meskers CG, Kwakkel G. Effects of Robot-Assisted Therapy for the Upper Limb After Stroke. //Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017; Feb;31(2):107-121. doi: 10.1177/1545968316666957. Epub 2016 Sep 24.
  49. Mehrholz J., Werner C., Kugler J., Pohl M. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD006185. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub2.
  50. Mehrholz J., Elsner B., Werner C., Kugler J., Pohl, M. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2013; 7:CD006185.
  51. Louie D.R., Eng J.J. Powered robotic exoskeletons in post-stroke rehabilitation of gait: a scoping review. //J. Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 Jun 8;13(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s12984-016-0162-5.
  52. Schwartz I., Meiner Z.Robotic-assisted gait training in neurological patients: who may benefit? //Ann Biomed Eng. 2015; May; 43(5):1260-9. doi: 10.1007/s10439-015-1283-x.
  53. Morone G., Bragoni M., Iosa M., De Angelis, D., Venturiero,V., Coiro P., et al. Who may benefit from robotic-assisted gait training? A randomized clinical trial in patients with subacute stroke. //Neurorehabilitation & Neural Repair, 2011; 25(7),636-644.
  54. Bragoni M., Broccoli M., Iosa M., Morone G., De Angelis D.,Venturiero V., et al. Influence of psychologic features on rehabilitation outcomes in patients with subacute stroke trained with robotic-aided walking therapy. // American Journal of Physical & Medicine Rehabilitation. - 2013. -92(10 Suppl 2). - P. 16-25.
  55. Iosa M., Morone G., Bragoni M., De Angelis D., Venturiero V., Coiro P., et al. Driving electromechanically assisted Gait Trainer for people with stroke. //Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 2011,48(2), 135-146.
  56. Morone G., Iosa, M., Bragoni M., De Angelis D., Venturiero V., Coiro P., et al. (2012). Who may have durable benefit from robotic gait training?: A 2-year follow-up randomized controlled trial in patients with subacute stroke. Stroke, 43(4), 1140-1142.
  57. Masiero S., Poli P., Rosati G., Zanotto D., Iosa M., Paolucci S., et al. The value of robotic systems in stroke rehabilitation. //Expert Review of Medical Devices, 2014;11(2), 187-198.
  58. Bouton C.E., et al., Restoring cortical control of functional movement in a human with quadriplegia. Nature, 2016.
  59. Collinger J.L., et al., High-performance neuroprosthetic control by an individual with tetraplegia. Lancet, 2013. 381(9866): 557-64.
  60. Turchetti G., Vitiello N., Trieste L., Romiti S., Geisler E., & Micera S. Why effectiveness of robot-mediated neurorehabilitation does not necessarily influence its adoption. //IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering, 2014; 7, 143-153.
  61. Hesse S., HeB A., Werner C., Kabbert N., & Buschfort R. Effect on arm function and cost of robot-assisted group therapy in subacute patients with stroke and a moderately to severely affected arm: A randomized controlled trial. //Clinical Rehabilitation. - 2014. - №28(7), рр. 637-647.
  62. Wagner, T.H., Lo, A.C., Peduzzi P., Bravata D.M., Huang G.D., Krebs H.I., et al. An economic analysis of robotassisted therapy for long-term upper-limb impairment after stroke. //Stroke, 2011; 42(9), 2630-2632.
  63. Morone G., Masiero S., Werner C., & Paolucci S. Advances in neuromotor stroke rehabilitation. //Biomed Research International, 2014; 236043.
  64. Asimov I.I. Robot. / New York, NY: Gnome Press, 1951.
  65. Sawyer R.J. Robot ethics. //Science, 2007; 318(5853), 1037.
  66. Fazekas G., Tavaszi I., Toth A.New opportunities in neuro-rehabilitation: robot mediated therapy in conditons post central nervous system impairments. Ideggyogy Sz. 2016 Mar 30;69(5-6):148-54.
  67. Pennycott A., Wyss D., Vallery H., Klamroth-Marganska V., Riener R. Towards more effective robotic gait training for stroke rehabilitation: a review. //J. Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012; 9(1):1. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-9-65.
  68. Emken J.L., Benitez R., Reinkensmeyer D.J. Human-robot cooperative movement training: learning a novel sensory motor transformation during walking with robotic assistance-as-needed. // J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2007;4(1):1. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-4-8.
  69. Keller U., Scho"lch S., Albisser U., Rudhe C., Curt A., Riener R., & Klamroth-Marganska, V. (2015). Robot-assisted arm assessments in spinal cord injured patients: A consideration of concept study. PLoS ONE, 10(5), e0126948.
  70. Maggioni S., Melendez-Calderon A., van Asseldonk E., Klamroth-Marganska V., LQnenburger L., Riener R., van der Kooij H. Robot-aided assessment of lower extremity functions: a review. //J. Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016; Aug 2;13(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12984-016-0180-3.
  71. Shirota C., van Asseldonk E., Matjacic Z., Vallery H., Barralon P., Maggioni S., Buurke J.H., Venemancorresponding J.F. Robot-supported assessment of balance in standing and walking //J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017; 14: 80. doi: 10.1186/s12984-017-0273-7.



Creative Commons License
Контент доступен под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

©

Эта статья открытого доступа по лицензии CC BY 4.0. Издательство: ФГБУ «НМИЦ РК» Минздрава России.
This is an open article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by the National Medical Research Center for Rehabilitation and Balneology.


Aссоциация НАЭСКЛ