Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

Modifying upper-limb inter-joint coordination in healthy subjects by training with a robotic exoskeleton

Authors: Tommaso Proietti, Emmanuel Guigon, Agnès Roby-Brami, Nathanaël Jarrassé

Published in: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The possibility to modify the usually pathological patterns of coordination of the upper-limb in stroke survivors remains a central issue and an open question for neurorehabilitation. Despite robot-led physical training could potentially improve the motor recovery of hemiparetic patients, most of the state-of-the-art studies addressing motor control learning, with artificial virtual force fields, only focused on the end-effector kinematic adaptation, by using planar devices. Clearly, an interesting aspect of studying 3D movements with a robotic exoskeleton, is the possibility to investigate the way the human central nervous system deals with the natural upper-limb redundancy for common activities like pointing or tracking tasks.

Methods

We asked twenty healthy participants to perform 3D pointing or tracking tasks under the effect of inter-joint velocity dependant perturbing force fields, applied directly at the joint level by a 4-DOF robotic arm exoskeleton. These fields perturbed the human natural inter-joint coordination but did not constrain directly the end-effector movements and thus subjects capability to perform the tasks. As a consequence, while the participants focused on the achievement of the task, we unexplicitly modified their natural upper-limb coordination strategy. We studied the force fields direct effect on pointing movements towards 8 targets placed in the 3D peripersonal space, and we also considered potential generalizations on 4 distinct other targets. Post-effects were studied after the removal of the force fields (wash-out and follow up). These effects were quantified by a kinematic analysis of the pointing movements at both end-point and joint levels, and by a measure of the final postures. At the same time, we analysed the natural inter-joint coordination through PCA.

Results

During the exposition to the perturbative fields, we observed modifications of the subjects movement kinematics at every level (joints, end-effector, and inter-joint coordination). Adaptation was evidenced by a partial decrease of the movement deviations due to the fields, during the repetitions, but it occurred only on 21% of the motions. Nonetheless post-effects were observed in 86% of cases during the wash-out and follow up periods (right after the removal of the perturbation by the fields and after 30 minutes of being detached from the exoskeleton). Important inter-individual differences were observed but with small variability within subjects. In particular, a group of subjects showed an over-shoot with respect to the original unexposed trajectories (in 30% of cases), but the most frequent consequence (in 55% of cases) was the partial persistence of the modified upper-limb coordination, adopted at the time of the perturbation. Temporal and spatial generalizations were also evidenced by the deviation of the movement trajectories, both at the end-effector and at the intermediate joints and the modification of the final pointing postures towards targets which were never exposed to any field.

Conclusions

Such results are the first quantified characterization of the effects of modification of the upper-limb coordination in healthy subjects, by imposing modification through viscous force fields distributed at the joint level, and could pave the way towards opportunities to rehabilitate pathological arm synergies with robots.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Levin MF, Kleim JA, Wolf SL. What do motor “recovery” and “compensation” mean in patients following stroke?Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009; 23(4):313–9.CrossRefPubMed Levin MF, Kleim JA, Wolf SL. What do motor “recovery” and “compensation” mean in patients following stroke?Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009; 23(4):313–9.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark VW, Morris DM. The learned nonuse phenomenon: implications for rehabilitation. Eura Medicophys. 2006; 42(3):241–56.PubMed Taub E, Uswatte G, Mark VW, Morris DM. The learned nonuse phenomenon: implications for rehabilitation. Eura Medicophys. 2006; 42(3):241–56.PubMed
3.
4.
go back to reference Krakauer JW. Motor learning: its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Current Opin Neurol. 2006; 19(1):84–90.CrossRef Krakauer JW. Motor learning: its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Current Opin Neurol. 2006; 19(1):84–90.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Winstein CJ, Kay DB. Translating the science into practice: shaping rehabilitation practice to enhance recovery after brain damage. Progress Brain Res. 2015; 218:331–60.CrossRef Winstein CJ, Kay DB. Translating the science into practice: shaping rehabilitation practice to enhance recovery after brain damage. Progress Brain Res. 2015; 218:331–60.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Proietti T, Crocher V, Roby-Brami A, Jarrassé N. Upper-limb robotic exoskeletons for neurorehabilitation: a review on control strategies. In: IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering.2016; 9:4–14. Proietti T, Crocher V, Roby-Brami A, Jarrassé N. Upper-limb robotic exoskeletons for neurorehabilitation: a review on control strategies. In: IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering.2016; 9:4–14.
7.
go back to reference Zhou SH, Fong J, Crocher V, Tan Y, Oetomo D, Mareels I. Learning control in robot-assisted rehabilitation of motor skills – a review. J Control Decis. 2016; 3(1):19–43.CrossRef Zhou SH, Fong J, Crocher V, Tan Y, Oetomo D, Mareels I. Learning control in robot-assisted rehabilitation of motor skills – a review. J Control Decis. 2016; 3(1):19–43.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Shadmehr R, Mussa-Ivaldi FA. Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task. J Neurosci. 1994; 14(5):3208–24.PubMed Shadmehr R, Mussa-Ivaldi FA. Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task. J Neurosci. 1994; 14(5):3208–24.PubMed
9.
go back to reference Scheidt RA, Reinkensmeyer DJ, Conditt MA, Rymer WZ, Mussa-Ivaldi FA. Persistence of motor adaptation during constrained, multi-joint, arm movements. J Neurophysiol. 2000; 84(2):853–62.PubMed Scheidt RA, Reinkensmeyer DJ, Conditt MA, Rymer WZ, Mussa-Ivaldi FA. Persistence of motor adaptation during constrained, multi-joint, arm movements. J Neurophysiol. 2000; 84(2):853–62.PubMed
10.
go back to reference Patton JL, Mussa-Ivaldi FA. Robot-assisted adaptive training: custom force fields for teaching movement patterns. Biomed Eng IEEE Trans. 2004; 51(4):636–46.CrossRef Patton JL, Mussa-Ivaldi FA. Robot-assisted adaptive training: custom force fields for teaching movement patterns. Biomed Eng IEEE Trans. 2004; 51(4):636–46.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Dipietro L, Krebs HI, Fasoli SE, Volpe BT, Stein J, Bever C, Hogan N. Changing motor synergies in chronic stroke. J Neurophysiol. 2007; 98(2):757–68.CrossRefPubMed Dipietro L, Krebs HI, Fasoli SE, Volpe BT, Stein J, Bever C, Hogan N. Changing motor synergies in chronic stroke. J Neurophysiol. 2007; 98(2):757–68.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Bernstein N. The coordination and regulation of movements. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1967. Bernstein N. The coordination and regulation of movements. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1967.
13.
go back to reference Yang N, Zhang M, Huang C, Jin D. Synergic analysis of upper limb target-reaching movements. J Biomech. 2002; 35(6):739–46.CrossRefPubMed Yang N, Zhang M, Huang C, Jin D. Synergic analysis of upper limb target-reaching movements. J Biomech. 2002; 35(6):739–46.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Desmurget M, Prablanc C. Postural control of three-dimensional prehension movements. J Neurophys. 1997; 77(1):452–64. Desmurget M, Prablanc C. Postural control of three-dimensional prehension movements. J Neurophys. 1997; 77(1):452–64.
15.
go back to reference Feldman AG, Levin MF. The origin and use of positional frames of reference in motor control. Behav Brain Sci. 1995; 18(04):723–44.CrossRef Feldman AG, Levin MF. The origin and use of positional frames of reference in motor control. Behav Brain Sci. 1995; 18(04):723–44.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Flanders M, Herrmann U. Two components of muscle activation: scaling with the speed of arm movement. J Neurophysiol. 1992; 67(4):931–43.PubMed Flanders M, Herrmann U. Two components of muscle activation: scaling with the speed of arm movement. J Neurophysiol. 1992; 67(4):931–43.PubMed
17.
go back to reference Nishikawa KC, Murray ST, Flanders M. Do arm postures vary with the speed of reaching?J Neurophysiol. 1999; 81(5):2582–6.PubMed Nishikawa KC, Murray ST, Flanders M. Do arm postures vary with the speed of reaching?J Neurophysiol. 1999; 81(5):2582–6.PubMed
18.
go back to reference Guigon E, Baraduc P, Desmurget M. Computational motor control: redundancy and invariance. J neurophysiol. 2007; 97(1):331–47.CrossRefPubMed Guigon E, Baraduc P, Desmurget M. Computational motor control: redundancy and invariance. J neurophysiol. 2007; 97(1):331–47.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Mistry M, Mohajerian P, Schaal S. Arm movement experiments with joint space force fields using an exoskeleton robot. In: Rehabilitation Robotics, 2005. ICORR 2005. 9th International Conference On. IEEE: 2005. p. 408–13. Mistry M, Mohajerian P, Schaal S. Arm movement experiments with joint space force fields using an exoskeleton robot. In: Rehabilitation Robotics, 2005. ICORR 2005. 9th International Conference On. IEEE: 2005. p. 408–13.
20.
go back to reference Garrec P, Friconneau JP, Measson Y, Perrot Y. Able an innovative transparent exoskeleton for the upper-limb. In: Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2008. IROS 2008. IEEE/RSJ International Conference On. IEEE: 2008. p. 1483–1488. Garrec P, Friconneau JP, Measson Y, Perrot Y. Able an innovative transparent exoskeleton for the upper-limb. In: Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2008. IROS 2008. IEEE/RSJ International Conference On. IEEE: 2008. p. 1483–1488.
22.
go back to reference Jarrassé N, Tagliabue M, Robertson JV, Maiza A, Crocher V, Roby-Brami A, Morel G. A methodology to quantify alterations in human upper limb movement during co-manipulation with an exoskeleton. Neural Syst Rehab Eng IEEE Trans. 2010; 18(4):389–97.CrossRef Jarrassé N, Tagliabue M, Robertson JV, Maiza A, Crocher V, Roby-Brami A, Morel G. A methodology to quantify alterations in human upper limb movement during co-manipulation with an exoskeleton. Neural Syst Rehab Eng IEEE Trans. 2010; 18(4):389–97.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Crocher V, Sahbani A, Robertson J, Roby-Brami A, Morel G. Constraining upper limb synergies of hemiparetic patients using a robotic exoskeleton in the perspective of neuro-rehabilitation. Neural Syst Rehab Eng IEEE Trans. 2012; 20(3):247–57. Accessed 2014-02-05.CrossRef Crocher V, Sahbani A, Robertson J, Roby-Brami A, Morel G. Constraining upper limb synergies of hemiparetic patients using a robotic exoskeleton in the perspective of neuro-rehabilitation. Neural Syst Rehab Eng IEEE Trans. 2012; 20(3):247–57. Accessed 2014-02-05.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Balasubramanian S, Melendez-Calderon A, Burdet E. A robust and sensitive metric for quantifying movement smoothness. Biomed Eng IEEE Trans. 2012; 59(8):2126–136.CrossRef Balasubramanian S, Melendez-Calderon A, Burdet E. A robust and sensitive metric for quantifying movement smoothness. Biomed Eng IEEE Trans. 2012; 59(8):2126–136.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Bockemühl T, Troje NF, Dürr V. Inter-joint coupling and joint angle synergies of human catching movements. Hum Movement Sci. 2010; 29(1):73–93.CrossRef Bockemühl T, Troje NF, Dürr V. Inter-joint coupling and joint angle synergies of human catching movements. Hum Movement Sci. 2010; 29(1):73–93.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Ganesh G, Haruno M, Kawato M, Burdet E. Motor memory and local minimization of error and effort, not global optimization, determine motor behavior. J Neurophysiol. 2010; 104(1):382–90.CrossRefPubMed Ganesh G, Haruno M, Kawato M, Burdet E. Motor memory and local minimization of error and effort, not global optimization, determine motor behavior. J Neurophysiol. 2010; 104(1):382–90.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Crocher V, Jarrassé N, Sahbani A, Roby-Brami A, Morel G. Changing human upper-limb synergies with an exoskeleton using viscous fields. In: Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2011 IEEE International Conference On. IEEE: 2011. p. 4657–663. Crocher V, Jarrassé N, Sahbani A, Roby-Brami A, Morel G. Changing human upper-limb synergies with an exoskeleton using viscous fields. In: Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2011 IEEE International Conference On. IEEE: 2011. p. 4657–663.
Metadata
Title
Modifying upper-limb inter-joint coordination in healthy subjects by training with a robotic exoskeleton
Authors
Tommaso Proietti
Emmanuel Guigon
Agnès Roby-Brami
Nathanaël Jarrassé
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1743-0003
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-017-0254-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1/2017 Go to the issue