Using Sound feedback to counteract visual distractor during robot-assisted movement training

Patient engagement and effort are thought to be important for maximizing the therapeutic benefit of robot-assisted movement exercise after neurologic injury, but little is understood about how the audio-visual feedback presented during training affects engagement and effort. For the study reported here, we hypothesized that visual distraction would decrease engagement during robot-assisted movement training, but that appropriate auditory feedback would counteract this effect. Non-disabled participants (n = 10) participated in a common therapeutic exercise in which they attempted to track a moving target presented on a computer screen as a robotic exoskeleton compliantly assisted their arm movement. Introducing a simple visual distractor significantly increased both tracking error and the interaction forces between the participants and the robot. Introducing auditory feedback of tracking error reduced the effect of the visual distractor, decreasing tracking error and interaction forces toward normative values. If tracking error is taken as a surrogate measure of participant engagement, these results indicate that the presence of even a modest level of visual distraction in the training environment may decrease engagement, and thus present a hazard to the effectiveness of training. However, providing appropriate task feedback through the auditory system can reduce the effect of visual distractors. Therefore, an integrated design of the audio, visual, and haptic environment is important for optimizing robot-assisted movement training.

[1]  T. Platz,et al.  Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving arm function and activities of daily living after stroke. , 2008, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[2]  D. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury , 2009, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[3]  G. Kwakkel,et al.  Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: a randomised trial , 1999, The Lancet.

[4]  Hermano Igo Krebs,et al.  Rehabilitation Robotics: Performance-Based Progressive Robot-Assisted Therapy , 2003, Auton. Robots.

[5]  T. Truelsen,et al.  Cost of stroke in Europe , 2005, European journal of neurology.

[6]  Raul Benitez,et al.  Motor adaptation as a greedy optimization of error and effort. , 2007, Journal of neurophysiology.

[7]  T. Flash,et al.  The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model , 1985, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[8]  H. Feys,et al.  Effect of a therapeutic intervention for the hemiplegic upper limb in the acute phase after stroke: a single-blind, randomized, controlled multicenter trial. , 1998, Stroke.

[9]  K. Furie,et al.  Heart disease and stroke statistics--2007 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. , 2008, Circulation.

[10]  Robert Riener,et al.  Adaptive support for patient-cooperative gait rehabilitation with the Lokomat , 2008, 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[11]  Ann M. Stowe,et al.  Post-infarct cortical plasticity and behavioral recovery using concurrent cortical stimulation and rehabilitative training: A feasibility study in primates , 2003, Neurological research.

[12]  H. Krebs,et al.  Effects of Robot-Assisted Therapy on Upper Limb Recovery After Stroke: A Systematic Review , 2008, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[13]  David J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Compliant Control of Post-Stroke Rehabilitation Robots: Using Movement-Specific Models to Improve Controller Performance , 2008 .

[14]  C. Skinner,et al.  Factors influencing compliance with home exercise programs among patients with upper-extremity impairment. , 1999, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[15]  J. P. Miller,et al.  Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. , 2006, JAMA.

[16]  Robert Riener,et al.  Robot-aided neurorehabilitation of the upper extremities , 2005, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

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

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

[19]  G. Verbeke,et al.  Early and Repetitive Stimulation of the Arm Can Substantially Improve the Long-Term Outcome After Stroke: A 5-Year Follow-up Study of a Randomized Trial , 2004, Stroke.

[20]  Peter Langhorne,et al.  Effects of Augmented Exercise Therapy Time After Stroke: A Meta-Analysis , 2004, Stroke.

[21]  D.J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  A pneumatic robot for re-training arm movement after stroke: rationale and mechanical design , 2005, 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, 2005. ICORR 2005..

[22]  Hermano Igo Krebs Robot Mediated Movement Therapy: A Tool for Training and Evaluation , 2007 .

[23]  Rong Song,et al.  A Comparison Between Electromyography-Driven Robot and Passive Motion Device on Wrist Rehabilitation for Chronic Stroke , 2009, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[24]  A. Heinemann,et al.  Relative Importance of Rehabilitation Therapy Characteristics on Functional Outcomes for Persons With Stroke , 2004, Stroke.

[25]  G. Kok,et al.  Correlates of exercise compliance in physical therapy. , 1993, Physical therapy.

[26]  B. Brewer,et al.  Poststroke Upper Extremity Rehabilitation: A Review of Robotic Systems and Clinical Results , 2007, Topics in stroke rehabilitation.

[27]  C. Granger,et al.  Trends in length of stay, living setting, functional outcome, and mortality following medical rehabilitation. , 2004, JAMA.

[28]  S. Scheer,et al.  Changes in the status of hospitalized stroke patients since inception of the prospective payment system in 1983. , 2002, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[29]  Ailie Turton,et al.  The Use of Home Therapy Programmes for Improving Recovery of the Upper Limb following Stroke , 1990 .

[30]  Steven C Cramer,et al.  Robotics, motor learning, and neurologic recovery. , 2004, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[31]  Henning Schmidt,et al.  Machines to support motor rehabilitation after stroke: 10 years of experience in Berlin. , 2006, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[32]  J. Krakauer,et al.  A computational neuroanatomy for motor control , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[33]  D.J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Automating Arm Movement Training Following Severe Stroke: Functional Exercises With Quantitative Feedback in a Gravity-Reduced Environment , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[34]  D.J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Optimizing Compliant, Model-Based Robotic Assistance to Promote Neurorehabilitation , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[35]  N. Byl,et al.  Functional Outcomes Can Vary by Dose: Learning-Based Sensorimotor Training for Patients Stable Poststroke , 2008, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.