Robot-Assisted Therapy

greatest; thus, robotics assisting reaching movements were seen to be most beneficial to the rehabilitation (Kahn et al., 2006).

Liao et al. (2012) compared the effects of robot-assisted therapy with dose-matched active control therapy while Volpe et al. (2008) compared robot-assisted therapy to intensive movement protocol on the improvement of motor movements of the affected arm post-stroke. Both studies showed that when used in combination, their two forms of rehabilitation worked best in improving motor movements, as opposed to using them separately (Liao et al., 2012; Volpe et al., 2008). While comparing robot-assisted therapy to dose-matched active control therapy, the robot-assisted therapy group had significant increase in motor function

This review found that robot-assisted therapy of the upper limb improved both long and short term motor control in patients that had either subacute or chronic strokes (Prange, Jannink, Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Hermens, & IJzerman, 2006). This review also found robot-assisted therapy to be superior to conventional therapy at improving motor control; however, there was not enough consistency to state that robot-assisted therapy is superior in helping to gain back functional movements (Prange et al., 2006). On the other hand, Mehrolz et al. (2012) determined that improving motor control through the use of robot-assisted therapy after a stroke is still unclear. However, they did see an improvement in the function of activities of daily living through improved arm function but improved muscle strength was not observed in the paretic arm. Overall, this Cochrane review determined that robot-assisted therapy can be used in rehabilitation, but more studies need to be done to determine how often and when they should be implemented (Mehrolz et al., 2012). Overall, most of the literature agrees with Masiero, Celia, Rosati, and Armani (2007), stroke patients that receive both robot-assisted therapy in combination with conventional therapy methods show the greatest improvements in motor control and functional

The evolution from idea to application involves an integration of multiple theories, practice models and frames of reference. Robotic assisted therapy is a form of rehabilitation therapy that strongly integrates biomechanical and motor learning frame of references.

Robot-assisted therapy is built on a strong foundation of the biomechanical frame of reference. Robot-assisted therapy applies the principles of kinesiology while taking gravitational forces on the body into consideration. The focus of this framework is to address the range of motion, muscle strength and endurance of the patient (Cole & Tufano, 2008). In the ARM Guide study, Kahn et al. (2006) used robot-assisted therapy to practice reaching movements with patients who had a stroke. The repetitive reaching motion assisted by the robotic device is an excellent representation of the biomechanical framework in that its ultimate goal is to improve range of motion and muscle strength over time through functional movements. Another example involving robot-assisted therapy is NeReBot training which emphasizes shoulder and elbow motion, specifically flexion/extension, pronation/supination, and abduction/adduction through directional guidance via a robotic device (Masiero et al.,