The effect of random or sequential presentation of targets during robot-assisted therapy on children.

BACKGROUND Robot assisted upper extremity therapy has been shown to be effective in adult stroke patients and in children with cerebral palsy (CP) and other acquired brain injuries (ABI). The patient's active involvement is a factor in its efficacy. However, this demands focused attention during training sessions, which can be a challenge for children. OBJECTIVE To compare results of training requiring two different levels of focused attention. Differences in short term performance and retention of gains as a function of training protocol as measured by the Fugl-Meyer (FM) were predicted. METHODS Thirty-one children with CP or ABI were randomly divided into two groups. All received 16 one hour sessions of robot-assisted therapy (twice a week for 8 weeks) where they moved a robot handle to direct a cursor on the screen toward designated targets. One group had targets presented sequentially in clockwise fashion, the other presented in random order. Thus, one group could anticipate the position of each target, the other could not. RESULTS Both groups showed significant functional improvement after therapy, but no significant difference between groups was observed. CONCLUSIONS Assist-as-needed robotic training is effective in children with CP or ABI with small non-significant differences attributed to attentional demand.

[1]  T. Jarus,et al.  Motor learning and occupational therapy: the organization of practice. , 1994, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[2]  N. Hogan,et al.  Robotic therapy for chronic motor impairments after stroke: Follow-up results. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[3]  N. Hogan,et al.  Robot training enhanced motor outcome in patients with stroke maintained over 3 years , 1999, Neurology.

[4]  G. Kwakkel,et al.  The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: what's the evidence? , 2004, Clinical rehabilitation.

[5]  N. Hogan,et al.  Robot-aided sensorimotor arm training improves outcome in patients with chronic stroke , 2003, Neurology.

[6]  Hermano Igo Krebs,et al.  Robotic Therapy and Botulinum Toxin Type A: A Novel Intervention Approach for Cerebral Palsy , 2008, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[7]  H. Barbeau Locomotor Training in Neurorehabilitation: Emerging Rehabilitation Concepts , 2003, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[8]  G. Kwakkel,et al.  Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. , 2004, Restorative neurology and neuroscience.

[9]  N. Hogan,et al.  A novel approach to stroke rehabilitation , 2000, Neurology.

[10]  R. Magill,et al.  American Psychological Association, Inc. The Locus of Contextual Interference in Motor-Skill Acquisition i , 2022 .

[11]  N. Hogan,et al.  The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. , 1997, Archives of neurology.

[12]  L Masia,et al.  The impact of robotic rehabilitation in children with acquired or congenital movement disorders. , 2009, European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine.

[13]  Jill G. Zwicker,et al.  A Reflection on Motor Learning Theory in Pediatric Occupational Therapy Practice , 2009, Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie.

[14]  J. Liepert,et al.  Treatment-induced cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. , 2000, Stroke.

[15]  Hermano Igo Krebs,et al.  Upper Limb Robotic Therapy for Children with Hemiplegia , 2008, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[16]  M. Aisen,et al.  Cerebral palsy: clinical care and neurological rehabilitation , 2011, The Lancet Neurology.

[17]  Hermano Igo Krebs,et al.  New horizons for robot-assisted therapy in pediatrics. , 2012, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[18]  P. Grimaud [Cerebral palsy]. , 1972, Pediatrie.

[19]  N. Hogan,et al.  Motions or muscles? Some behavioral factors underlying robotic assistance of motor recovery. , 2006, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[20]  H. Krebs,et al.  Robot‐assisted task‐specific training in cerebral palsy , 2009, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[21]  R. Nudo,et al.  Neural Substrates for the Effects of Rehabilitative Training on Motor Recovery After Ischemic Infarct , 1996, Science.