MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384924601 · doi:10.1002/pri.2038

Safety and usability of the MAK exoskeleton in patients with stroke

2023· article· en· W4384924601 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. Cumplido‐Trasmonte, Eva Barquín-Santos, E. Garcés‐Castellote, María Dolores Gor-García-Fogeda, Mar Hernández, Alba Gutiérrez, Roberto Cano‐de‐la‐Cuerda, A. L. López‐Morón

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiotherapy Research International · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónConsejería de Educación e InvestigaciónComunidad de Madrid
KeywordsUsabilityExoskeletonPhysical medicine and rehabilitationStroke (engine)MedicinePsychologyPhysical therapyComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Stroke is one of the leading causes of disability in adults worldwide, and one of the main objectives in the rehabilitation of these patients is to recover the gait. New technologies have emerged to cope with this issue, complementing conventional therapy with the use of devices such as exoskeletons. The Marsi Active Knee (MAK) exoskeleton (Marsi Bionics SL, Madrid, Spain) has already been tested, but an updated version was improved to allow the patients to perform functional exercises. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and usability of the MAK in the stroke population as well as its potential clinical effects. METHODS: A single-group open label intervention trial was conducted. The device was used twice a week for 5 weeks during 1 h per visit. During the visits, sit-to-stand transitions, walking, stair climbing, trunk rotations, and weight-transfer exercises were performed using the device. Adverse events were collected from participants and therapists to assess safety. The Quebec User Evaluation of the Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) was used by both therapists and participants to assess usability. To evaluate its clinical effects, active range of motion (ROM) and muscle strength were assessed in the lower limb. RESULTS: Six participants with stroke were recruited. The device was shown to be safe since no serious adverse events were reported neither by patients nor by therapists. Every proposed exercise was performed. Regarding clinical effects, overall muscle strength showed an increase after the treatment, although ROM measurements did not show any difference. DISCUSSION: Our results suggest that the MAK device is safe for stroke patients. Nevertheless, further changes to enhance usability are recommended, such as an improvement of the attachment system and an adaptation for the drop foot. Beneficial effects regarding increases in muscle strength were obtained. Further trials with a larger sample size, longer intervention periods, and a control group are needed to verify these results. Also, future research should focus on the usability of the MAK as an assistive technology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiotherapy Research InternationalSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207