Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pneumatic artificial muscle-based stroke rehabilitation device for upper and lower limbs

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Intelligent Service Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rehabilitation of the upper and lower limbs is crucial for patients recovering from strokes, surgeries, or injuries. Traditional rehabilitation often takes place in hospitals under the guidance of a therapist, which can delay treatment due to various constraints. This paper proposes a soft robotic device designed to aid in the flexion and extension of both the elbow and knee. The device utilizes pneumatic artificial muscles, constructed from an elastomeric bladder with a threaded mesh exterior, as its actuating mechanism. It operates in two distinct modes: a continuous passive mode, where continuous, repetitive flexion, and extension of limbs are carried out, and an active intent-based assisted mode, which detects a patient's movement intention via surface electromyography (sEMG) and subsequently aids in the movement execution. To test the effectiveness of the device, sEMG electrodes were placed on upper and lower limbs of six healthy male subjects, range of motion, and muscle activity were recorded with and without the device. Also NASA task load index (NASA-TLX) was calculated for the usability of the device. The results indicate the required muscle activity and range of motions for both upper and lower limb rehabilitation are effectively generated in both the modes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

References

  1. Parmar P (2018) Stroke: classification and diagnosis. Clin Pharm. https://doi.org/10.1211/CP.2018.20204150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Schimmel M, Ono T, Lam OLT, Müller F (2017) Oro-facial impairment in stroke patients. J Oral Rehabil 44(4):313–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bilic R, Kolundzic R, Jelic MM (2001) Overuse injury syndromes of the hand, forearm and elbow. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol 52:403–414

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sacco RL et al (2013) An updated definition of stroke for the 21st century: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American heart association/American stroke association. Stroke 44(7):2064–2089. https://doi.org/10.1161/STR.0b013e318296aeca

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Saita K, Morishita T, Hyakutake K, Ogata T, Fukuda H, Kamada S, Inoue T (2020) Feasibility of robot-assisted rehabilitation in poststroke recovery of upper limb function depending on the severity. Neurol Med Chir 60(4):217–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Malik AN, Tariq H, Afridi A, Azam Rathore F (2022) Technological advancements in stroke rehabilitation. J Pak Med Assoc 72(8):1672–1674

    Google Scholar 

  7. Keller U, van Hedel HJA, Klamroth-Marganska V et al (2016) ChARMin: the frst actuated exoskeleton robot for pediatric arm rehabilitation. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 21(5):2201–2213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wu Q, Wang X, Chen B et al (2018) Development of a minimal-interventionbased admittance control strategy for upper extremity rehabilitation exoskeleton. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet Syst 48(6):1005–1016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Washabaugh EP, Guo J, Chang CK, Remy CD, Krishnan C (2018) A portable passive rehabilitation robot for upper-extremity functional resistance training. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 66(2):496–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Li Z, Xie H, Li W et al (2014) Proceeding of human exoskeleton technology and discussions on future research. Chin J Mech Eng 27(3):437–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Qassim HM, Wan Hasan WZ (2020) A review on upper limb rehabilitation robots. Appl Sci 10(19):6976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gopura RARC, Bandara DSV, Kiguchi K et al (2016) Developments in hardware systems of active upper-limb exoskeleton robots: a review. Robot Auton Syst 75:203–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Akdoğan E, Aktan ME, Koru AT et al (2018) Hybrid impedance control of a robot manipulator for wrist and forearm rehabilitation: performance analysis and clinical results. Mechatronics 49:77–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhao Z, Xiao J, Jia H, Zhang H, Hao L (2021) Prescribed performance control for the upper-limb exoskeleton system in passive rehabilitation training tasks. Appl Sci 11(21):10174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Charles SK, Krebs HI (2005) Wrist rehabilitation following stroke: Initial clinical results. In: Proc. 9th international conference on rehabilitation robotics, 2005, pp 13–16

  16. Oguntosin VW, Mori Y, Kim H, Nasuto SJ, Kawamura S, Hayashi Y (2017) Design and validation of exoskeleton actuated by soft modules toward neurorehabilitation-vision-based control for precise reaching motion of upper limb. Front Neurosci 11:352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Niyetkaliyev AS, Hussain S, Ghayesh MH, Alici G (2017) Review on design and control aspects of robotic shoulder rehabilitation orthoses. IEEE Trans Hum Mach Syst 47:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sanjuan JD, Castillo AD, Padilla MA et al (2020) Cable driven exoskeleton for upper-limb rehabilitation: a design review. Robot Auton Syst 126:103445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wu Q, Wang X, Chen B et al (2018) Development of an RBFN-based neural-fuzzy adaptive control strategy for an upper limb rehabilitation exoskeleton. Mechatronics 53:85–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Li J, Fan W, Dong M, Rong X (2020) Implementation of passive compliance training on a parallel ankle rehabilitation robot to enhance safety. Ind Robot Int J Robot Res Appl 47(5):747–755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Banala SK, Agrawal SK, Scholz JP (2007) Active leg exoskeleton (ALEX) for gait rehabilitation of motor-impaired patients. In: 2007 IEEE 10th international conference on rehabilitation robotics pp 401–407, IEEE

  22. Banala SK, Kim SH, Agrawal SK, Scholz JP (2008) Robot assisted gait training with active leg exoskeleton (ALEX). IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 17(1):2–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kalita B, Narayan J, Dwivedy SK (2021) Development of active lower limb robotic-based orthosis and exoskeleton devices: a systematic review. Int J Soc Robot 13:775–793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Liu Q, Liu Y, Li Y, Zhu C, Meng W, Ai Q, Xie SQ (2021) Path planning and impedance control of a soft modular exoskeleton for coordinated upper limb rehabilitation. Front Neurorobot 15:745531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wang Y, Xu Q (2021) Design and testing of a soft parallel robot based on pneumatic artificial muscles for wrist rehabilitation. Sci Rep 11(1):1273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Nguyen HT, Trinh VC, Le TD (2020) An adaptive fast terminal sliding mode controller of exercise-assisted robotic arm for elbow joint rehabilitation featuring pneumatic artificial muscle actuator. Actuators 9(4):118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Liu Q, Zuo J, Zhu C et al (2020) Design and control of soft rehabilitation robots actuated by pneumatic muscles: state of the art. Future Gener Comput Syst 113:620–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wang J, Fei Y, Chen W (2020) Integration, sensing, and control of a modular soft-rigid pneumatic lower limb exoskeleton. Soft Robot 7(2):140–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Xu K, Zhao J, Qiu D et al (2014) A pilot study of a continuum shoulder exoskeleton for anatomy adaptive assistances. J Mech Robot 6(4):041011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Alamdari A, Krovi V (2016) Design and analysis of a cable-driven articulated rehabilitation system for gait training. J Mech Robot 8(5):051018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Cui X, Chen W, Jin X et al (2017) Design of a 7-DOF cable-driven arm exoskeleton (CAREX-7) and a controller for dexterous motion training or assistance. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 22(1):161–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Toth L, Schifer A, Nyitrai M et al (2020) Developing an anti-spastic orthosis for daily home-use of stroke patients using smart memory alloys and 3D printing technologies. Mater Des 195:109029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Polygerinos P, Wang Z, Galloway KC, Wood RJ, Walsh CJ (2015) Soft robotic glove for combined assistance and at-home rehabilitation. Robot Auton Syst 73:135–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lerner ZF, Harvey TA, Lawson JL (2019) A battery-powered ankle exoskeleton improves gait mechanics in a feasibility study of individuals with cerebral palsy. Ann Biomed Eng 47:1345–1356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Chiri A, Giovacchini F, Vitiello N, Cattin E, Roccella S, Vecchi F, Carrozza MC (2009) HANDEXOS: towards an exoskeleton device for the rehabilitation of the hand. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 1106–1111, St. Louis, MO, USA (2009)

  36. Iqbal J, Khan H, Tsagarakis NG, Caldwell DG (2014) A novel exoskeleton robotic system for hand rehabilitation–conceptualization to prototyping. Biocybern Biomed Eng 34(2):79–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Conti R, Allotta B, Meli E, Ridolfi A (2017) Development, design and validation of an assistive device for hand disabilities based on an innovative mechanism. Robotica 35(4):892–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Koo I, Yun C, Costa MVO, Scognamiglio JVF, Yangali TA, Park D, et al. (2014) Development of a meal assistive exoskeleton made of soft materials for polymyositis patients. In: proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), 2014, pp 542–547

  39. Park D, Koo I, Cho KJ (2015) Evaluation of an improved soft meal assistive exoskeleton with an adjustable weight-bearing system for people with disability. In: proceedings of the IEEE international conference on rehabilitation robotics, 2015, pp 79–84

  40. Lessard S, Pansodtee P, Robbins A, Trombadore JM, Kurniawan S, Teodorescu M (2018) A soft exosuit for flexible upper-extremity rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 26(8):1604–1617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Goppold JP, Kuschan J, Thiele G, Schmidt H, Krüger J, Hackbart R, et al. (2020) PowerGrasp-Design and evaluation of a modular soft-robotic arm exosuit for industrial applications. In: proceedings of the 52nd international symposium on robotics, 2020, pp 107–114

  42. O'Neill CT, Phipps NS, Cappello L, Paganoni S, Walsh CJ (2017) Soft wearable robot for the shoulder: design, characterization, and preliminary testing. In: IEEE international conference on rehabilitation robotics. Pp 1672–8

  43. Natividad RF, Yeow CH (2016) Development of a soft robotic shoulder assistive device for shoulder abduction. In: 6th IEEE RAS EMBS international conference on biomedical robotics and biomechatronics. IEEE, pp 989–993

  44. Kumar N, Pankaj D, Mahajan A, Kumar A, Sohi BS (2009) Evaluation of normal gait using electro-goniometer. J Sci Ind Res (India) 68(8):696–698

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pornpipatsakul K, Ajavakom N (2023) Estimation of knee assistive moment in a gait cycle using knee angle and knee angular velocity through machine learning and artificial stiffness control strategy (MLASCS). Robotics. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics12020044

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology (UET) Lahore, Narowal Campus, Pakistan

    Muhammad Umair Ahmad Khan, Arsalan Ali, Rabbia Muneer & Muhammad Faisal

Authors
  1. Muhammad Umair Ahmad Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arsalan Ali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rabbia Muneer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Muhammad Faisal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Umair Ahmad Khan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khan, M.U.A., Ali, A., Muneer, R. et al. Pneumatic artificial muscle-based stroke rehabilitation device for upper and lower limbs. Intel Serv Robotics 17, 33–42 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-023-00509-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-023-00509-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation