↓ Skip to main content

Soft robotic devices for hand rehabilitation and assistance: a narrative review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
220 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
489 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Soft robotic devices for hand rehabilitation and assistance: a narrative review
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12984-018-0350-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chia-Ye Chu, Rita M. Patterson

Abstract

The debilitating effects on hand function from a number of a neurologic disorders has given rise to the development of rehabilitative robotic devices aimed at restoring hand function in these patients. To combat the shortcomings of previous traditional robotics, soft robotics are rapidly emerging as an alternative due to their inherent safety, less complex designs, and increased potential for portability and efficacy. While several groups have begun designing devices, there are few devices that have progressed enough to provide clinical evidence of their design's therapeutic abilities. Therefore, a global review of devices that have been previously attempted could facilitate the development of new and improved devices in the next step towards obtaining clinical proof of the rehabilitative effects of soft robotics in hand dysfunction. A literature search was performed in SportDiscus, Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles related to the design of soft robotic devices for hand rehabilitation. A framework of the key design elements of the devices was developed to ease the comparison of the various approaches to building them. This framework includes an analysis of the trends in portability, safety features, user intent detection methods, actuation systems, total DOF, number of independent actuators, device weight, evaluation metrics, and modes of rehabilitation. In this study, a total of 62 articles representing 44 unique devices were identified and summarized according to the framework we developed to compare different design aspects. By far, the most common type of device was that which used a pneumatic actuator to guide finger flexion/extension. However, the remainder of our framework elements yielded more heterogeneous results. Consequently, those results are summarized and the advantages and disadvantages of many design choices as well as their rationales were highlighted. The past 3 years has seen a rapid increase in the development of soft robotic devices for hand rehabilitative applications. These mostly preclinical research prototypes display a wide range of technical solutions which have been highlighted in the framework developed in this analysis. More work needs to be done in actuator design, safety, and implementation in order for these devices to progress to clinical trials. It is our goal that this review will guide future developers through the various design considerations in order to develop better devices for patients with hand impairments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 489 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 489 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 74 15%
Student > Master 69 14%
Student > Bachelor 46 9%
Researcher 38 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 4%
Other 55 11%
Unknown 186 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 198 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 3%
Computer Science 13 3%
Neuroscience 10 2%
Other 42 9%
Unknown 196 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 February 2020.
All research outputs
#7,488,820
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#488
of 1,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,922
of 330,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#12
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.