An Evaluation Model of Stroke Rehabilitation

Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 216)

Abstract

At present, the evaluation of stroke rehabilitation is mainly based on physician’s experience and evaluates the degree of one of function injury for motor function, nerve function, and activities of daily living. There is no a quantitative method. Therefore, the evaluation model of stroke rehabilitation is proposed and evaluates the condition of stroke patients quantitatively. Experimental results show that the evaluation model of stroke rehabilitation correlates well with the Fugl-Meyer assessment, which indicates that the model is effective.

Keywords

Rehabilitation evaluation Evaluation model of stroke rehabilitation Rehabilitation evaluation indicator 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Smith DL, Akhtar AJ (1985) Motor function after stoke. Age Ageing 14:46–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Qin Yin, Bi Sheng, Wang Fugen (2004) The stroke evaluation method of upper extremity function and clinical application. Chin J Rehabil Med 19(3):232–233Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schuind FA, Mouraux D, Robert C et al (2003) Functional and outcome evaluation of the hand and wrist. Hand Clin 19(3):361–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Colombo Roberto, Pisano Fabrizio, silvestro Micera et al (2005) Robotic techniques for upper limb evaluation and rehabilitation of stroke patients. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 13(3):311–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rodriguez-Cheu LE, Cancino S, Rodriguez M, Ortiz JG (2010) Development of robotic system with artificial vision for the evaluation of rehabilitation in underwater gait therapy. In: International conference on biomedical robotics and biomechatronics, vol 47. Japan, pp 831–836Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reinkensmeyer DJ, Dewald JPA, Rymer WZ (1999) Guidancebased quantification of arm impairment following brain injury: a pilot study. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 7(1):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lum PS, Burgar CG, Kenney DE et al (1999) Quantification of force abnormalities during passive and active-assisted upper-limb reaching movements in post-stroke hemiparesis. IEEE Trans on Biomed Eng 46(6):652–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I et al (1975) the post-stoke hemiplegia patient: I. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med 7:13–31Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheng F (2010) Stroke rehabilitation guide, vol 34. Shanxi Science and Technology Press, Shanxi, pp 113–115Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xiong H, Liu Z, Ren Y (2007) Rehabilitation of patients with acute stroke assessment scale analysis and prognosis. Mod Prev Med 37(9):1755–1756Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guo Y (2002) Theory and method of comprehensive evaluation, vol 68. Science and Technology Press, Beijing, pp 55–58Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wen Ji
    • 1
  • Jianhui Wang
    • 1
  • Xiaoke Fang
    • 1
  • Shusheng Gu
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Information Science and EngineeringNortheastern UniversityShenyangChina

Personalised recommendations