Integrating hand exoskeletons into goal-oriented clinic and home stroke and spinal cord injury rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Robotic exoskeletons are emerging as rehabilitation and assistive technologies that simultaneously restore function and enable independence for people with disabilities. Aim We investigated the feasibility and orthotic and restorative effects of an exoskeleton-supported goal-directed rehabilitation program for people with hand impairments after stroke or Spinal Cord Injury (SCI). Method A single-arm case-series feasibility study was conducted using a wearable untethered hand exoskeleton during goal-directed therapy programs with in-clinic and at-home components. Therapists trained stroke and SCI patients to use a hand exoskeleton during rehabilitation exercises, activities of daily living and patient-selected goals. Each patient received a 1-hour in-clinic training session on five consecutive days, then took the exoskeleton home for two consecutive days to perform therapist-recommended tasks. Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) and the Box and Block Test (BBT) were administered at baseline, after in-clinic therapy and after home use, with and again without wearing the exoskeleton. The System Usability Scale (SUS), Motor Activity Log, and Fugl-Meyer Assessment were also administered to assess the intervention’s acceptability, adherence, usability and effectiveness. Results Four stroke patients (Chedoke McMaster Stage of Hand 2–4) and one SCI patient (ASIA C8 Motor Stage 1) 23 ± 19 months post-injury wore the hand exoskeleton to perform 280 ± 23 exercise repetitions in the clinic and additional goal-oriented tasks at home. The patients performed their own goals and the dexterity task with higher performance following the 7-days therapy program in comparison to baseline for both exoskeleton-assisted (ΔGAS: 18 ± 10, ΔBBT: 1 ± 5) and unassisted (ΔGAS: 14 ± 14, ΔBBT: 3 ± 4) assessments. Therapists and patients provided ‘good’ SUS ratings of 78 ± 6 and no harmful events were reported. Conclusions The exoskeleton-supported stroke and SCI therapy program with in-clinic and at-home training components was feasible.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".