↓ Skip to main content

Positive effects of robotic exoskeleton training of upper limb reaching movements after stroke

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
233 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Positive effects of robotic exoskeleton training of upper limb reaching movements after stroke
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1743-0003-9-36
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antonio Frisoli, Caterina Procopio, Carmelo Chisari, Ilaria Creatini, Luca Bonfiglio, Massimo Bergamasco, Bruno Rossi, Maria Chiara Carboncini, Maria Carboncini

Abstract

This study, conducted in a group of nine chronic patients with right-side hemiparesis after stroke, investigated the effects of a robotic-assisted rehabilitation training with an upper limb robotic exoskeleton for the restoration of motor function in spatial reaching movements. The robotic assisted rehabilitation training was administered for a period of 6 weeks including reaching and spatial antigravity movements. To assess the carry-over of the observed improvements in movement during training into improved function, a kinesiologic assessment of the effects of the training was performed by means of motion and dynamic electromyographic analysis of reaching movements performed before and after training. The same kinesiologic measurements were performed in a healthy control group of seven volunteers, to determine a benchmark for the experimental observations in the patients' group. Moreover degree of functional impairment at the enrolment and discharge was measured by clinical evaluation with upper limb Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale (FMA, 0-66 points), Modified Ashworth scale (MA, 0-60 pts) and active ranges of motion. The robot aided training induced, independently by time of stroke, statistical significant improvements of kinesiologic (movement time, smoothness of motion) and clinical (4.6 ± 4.2 increase in FMA, 3.2 ± 2.1 decrease in MA) parameters, as a result of the increased active ranges of motion and improved co-contraction index for shoulder extension/flexion. Kinesiologic parameters correlated significantly with clinical assessment values, and their changes after the training were affected by the direction of motion (inward vs. outward movement) and position of target to be reached (ipsilateral, central and contralateral peripersonal space). These changes can be explained as a result of the motor recovery induced by the robotic training, in terms of regained ability to execute single joint movements and of improved interjoint coordination of elbow and shoulder joints.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
Unknown 226 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 21%
Student > Master 43 18%
Student > Bachelor 33 14%
Researcher 21 9%
Student > Postgraduate 12 5%
Other 38 16%
Unknown 37 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 73 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 37 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 8%
Neuroscience 17 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 5%
Other 31 13%
Unknown 44 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 April 2018.
All research outputs
#9,767,278
of 12,745,229 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#515
of 712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,816
of 119,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,745,229 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 119,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.