Posters
Presentation Type
Poster
Discipline Track
Biomedical Science
Abstract Type
Research/Clinical
Abstract
Background: Clinical studies utilizing the Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand robot are increasing in recent years. However, there is a lack of standardized values from healthy participants that can be used to compare to patients with stroke or other neurodegenerative disorders. We aim to create this standardized set of values by employing the new Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand robot on healthy participants. Establishing normative values will allow our lab, and other laboratories, to have a baseline that can be used to track rehabilitation progress in patients with neurological disorders, such as stroke. Creating this standardization may also allow for more tailored rehabilitative approaches to be created for individual patients and their needs.
Methods: Our IRB-approved study involved a single session visit that lasted approximately 90 minutes. Healthy participants were enrolled, and handedness determined using the Edinburg Handedness Inventory. For each participant, the right and left arm was evaluated with the Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand robot. On both arms, evaluations were collected for the arm and hand in 45- and 90-degrees forearm supination. Evaluation required participants to draw a circle, reach targets on the computer screen and grip as quickly as possible with their hands.
Results: A MANOVA testing positioning angle resulted in significant main effect on Arm evaluation metrics, Pillai’s Trace = .19, F(11, 139) = 2.94, partial eta2 = .19, p < .01. Post hoc tests revealed better performance on 45 degrees compared to zero degrees on Point-to-Point Smoothness. Conversely, zero degrees performance was better in Target Accuracy but slower in movement duration. For mean wrist evaluations, A MANCOVA resulted in significant interaction effects of positioning angle and range of motion grasp cm were witnessed, Pillai’s Trace = .61, F(22, 268) = 5.37, partial eta2 = .31, p < .001. Post hoc tests revealed better hand performance on a zero-degree angle compared to 45 on active range of motion (ROM) hand grasp time, and passive hand ROM grasp force, p <.05.
Conclusion:Our results indicate that wrist position in the Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand unit was significantly related to outcome metrics. Specifically, a wrist angle of 45 degrees was related to improved performance. This result is plausible since typical reaching patterns of the upper limb naturally have the wrist in the 45 degree angle. Overall, our results highlight that optimized baseline values for the robotic arm rehabilitation device are dependent on wrist position, handedness and area measured. We anticipate our values will provide normal comparators as this device is used to treat and diagnosis patients with neurological disorders.
Recommended Citation
Cabello, Marysol; Rojano, Diego; Salinas, Daniel; Oquita, Ramiro; Cuello, Victoria; and Potter-Baker, Kelsey, "Optimization of Baseline Values for the Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand Rehabilitation Robot" (2024). Research Symposium. 54.
https://scholarworks.utrgv.edu/somrs/2024/posters/54
Included in
Optimization of Baseline Values for the Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand Rehabilitation Robot
Background: Clinical studies utilizing the Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand robot are increasing in recent years. However, there is a lack of standardized values from healthy participants that can be used to compare to patients with stroke or other neurodegenerative disorders. We aim to create this standardized set of values by employing the new Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand robot on healthy participants. Establishing normative values will allow our lab, and other laboratories, to have a baseline that can be used to track rehabilitation progress in patients with neurological disorders, such as stroke. Creating this standardization may also allow for more tailored rehabilitative approaches to be created for individual patients and their needs.
Methods: Our IRB-approved study involved a single session visit that lasted approximately 90 minutes. Healthy participants were enrolled, and handedness determined using the Edinburg Handedness Inventory. For each participant, the right and left arm was evaluated with the Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand robot. On both arms, evaluations were collected for the arm and hand in 45- and 90-degrees forearm supination. Evaluation required participants to draw a circle, reach targets on the computer screen and grip as quickly as possible with their hands.
Results: A MANOVA testing positioning angle resulted in significant main effect on Arm evaluation metrics, Pillai’s Trace = .19, F(11, 139) = 2.94, partial eta2 = .19, p < .01. Post hoc tests revealed better performance on 45 degrees compared to zero degrees on Point-to-Point Smoothness. Conversely, zero degrees performance was better in Target Accuracy but slower in movement duration. For mean wrist evaluations, A MANCOVA resulted in significant interaction effects of positioning angle and range of motion grasp cm were witnessed, Pillai’s Trace = .61, F(22, 268) = 5.37, partial eta2 = .31, p < .001. Post hoc tests revealed better hand performance on a zero-degree angle compared to 45 on active range of motion (ROM) hand grasp time, and passive hand ROM grasp force, p <.05.
Conclusion:Our results indicate that wrist position in the Bionik InMotion Arm/Hand unit was significantly related to outcome metrics. Specifically, a wrist angle of 45 degrees was related to improved performance. This result is plausible since typical reaching patterns of the upper limb naturally have the wrist in the 45 degree angle. Overall, our results highlight that optimized baseline values for the robotic arm rehabilitation device are dependent on wrist position, handedness and area measured. We anticipate our values will provide normal comparators as this device is used to treat and diagnosis patients with neurological disorders.