Robotic systems assess joint dynamics objectively by perturbing the limb and estimating properties such as impedance. Position perturbations constrain the limb to a target trajectory, reducing variability in task execution but obstructing voluntary motion. Force perturbations allow voluntary movement but elicit orientation-dependent responses, increasing the number of trials needed for accurate estimates. To overcome these limitations, we combined the flexibility of admittance control with the repeatability of position perturbations. A minimum-jerk trajectory ensures smooth transitions. The experiment with six healthy participants was performed to demonstrate the reliability, accuracy and smoothness of applying such perturbations during voluntary movement. Reliability was the proportion of perturbations that reached the target velocity within one millisecond of the acceleration time window. Accuracy was measured as the RMSE between the target and measured velocity during the constant velocity. Smoothness was assessed as perceivability: the fraction of trials in which participants correctly detected a perturbation. The controller allows continuous voluntary movement, switching only during perturbations to impose a precise, specified perturbation. All perturbations reached the target velocity within one millisecond of the acceleration time window; thus, the method is reliable. Under the most demanding condition— an increase to 200 deg/s in 0.01 s—the RMSE between target and measured velocity was 1.1 deg/s (0.55%), indicating a high accuracy. Specially designed perturbations had a perceivability accuracy of 22.1%, indicating smooth transitions between control modes. Together, these results indicate a promising approach for assessing joint dynamics during voluntary elbow movement, enabling assessment during activities of daily living.

Background: Proprioception is important for regaining motor function in the paretic upper extremity after stroke. However, clinical assessments of proprioception are subjective and require verbal responses from the patient to applied proprioceptive stimuli. Cortical responses evoked by robotic wrist perturbations and measured by electroencephalography (EEG) may be an objective method to support current clinical assessments of proprioception. Objective: To establish whether evoked cortical responses reflect proprioceptive deficits as assessed by clinical scales and whether they predict upper extremity motor function at 26 weeks after stroke. Methods: Thirty-one patients with stroke were included. In week 1, 3, 5, 12, and 26 after stroke, the upper extremity sections of the Erasmus modified Nottingham Sensory Assessment (EmNSA-UE) and the Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment (FM-UE) and the EEG responses (64 channels) to robotic wrist perturbations were measured. The extent to which proprioceptive input was conveyed to the affected hemisphere was estimated by the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the evoked response. The relationships between SNR and EmNSA-UE as well as SNR and time after stroke were investigated using linear regression. Receiver-operating-characteristic curves were used to compare the predictive values of SNR and EmNSA-UE for predicting whether patients regained some selective motor control (FM-UE > 22) or whether they could only move their paretic upper extremity within basic limb synergies (FM-UE ≤ 22) at 26 weeks after stroke. Results: Patients (N = 7) with impaired proprioception (EmNSA-UE proprioception score < 8) had significantly smaller SNR than patients with unimpaired proprioception (N = 24) [EmNSA-UE proprioception score = 8, t(29) = 2.36, p = 0.03]. No significant effect of time after stroke on SNR was observed. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the predictive value between EmNSA-UE and SNR for predicting motor function at 26 weeks after stroke. Conclusion: The SNR of the evoked cortical response does not significantly change as a function of time after stroke and differs between patients with clinically assessed impaired and unimpaired proprioception, suggesting that SNR reflects persistent damage to proprioceptive pathways. A similar predictive value with respect to EmNSA-UE suggests that SNR may be used as an objective predictor next to clinical sensory assessments for predicting motor function at 26 weeks after stroke.

Patients with poor upper limb motor recovery after stroke are likely to develop increased resistance to passive wrist extension, i.e., wrist hyper-resistance. Quantification of the underlying neural and non-neural elastic components is of clinical interest. This cross-sectional study compared two methods: a commercially available device (NeuroFlexor®) with an experimental EMG-based device (Wristalyzer) in 43 patients with chronic stroke. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (r) between components, modified Ashworth scale (MAS) and range of passive wrist extension (PRoM) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals. Neural as well as elastic components assessed by both devices were associated (r = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.38-0.77 and r = 0.53, 95%CI: 0.28–0.72, respectively). The neural component assessed by the NeuroFlexor® associated significantly with the elastic components of NeuroFlexor® (r = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.18–0.67) and Wristalyzer (r = 0.36, 95%CI: 0.06–0.59). The neural component assessed by the Wristalyzer was not associated with the elastic components of both devices. Neural and elastic components of both devices associated similarly with the MAS (r = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.34–0.75 vs. 0.49, 95%CI: 0.22–0.69 and r = 0.51, 95%CI: 0.25–0.70 vs. 0.30, 95%CI: 0.00–0.55); elastic components associated with PRoM (r = -0.44, 95%CI: -0.65- -0.16 vs. -0.74, 95%CI: -0.85- -0.57 for NeuroFlexor® and Wristalyzer respectively). Results demonstrate that both methods perform similarly regarding the quantification of neural and elastic wrist hyper-resistance components and have an added value when compared to clinical assessment with the MAS alone. The added value of EMG in the discrimination between neural and non-neural components requires further investigation.

Introduction: A stooped posture is one of the characteristic motor symptoms of patients with Parkinson's disease, and has been linked to impairments in daily activities and quality of life. We aimed to test the efficacy, safety, practical utility and user-friendliness of a posture correction and vibrotactile trunk angle feedback device (the UpRight) in the home setting of patients with Parkinson's disease with a stooped posture. It was hypothesized that ambulatory use of the UpRight would be safe, feasible and result in a less stooped posture, i.e. a lower trunk angle during daily activities. Methods: 15 patients wore the UpRight during a baseline period of 1 week (no feedback), followed by an intervention period of 1 week (feedback). Results: We found a significant decrease (average -5,4°) in trunk angle from baseline period to intervention period without the occurrence of adverse events. In addition, patients found the device usable and beneficial to posture. Conclusion: Use of the feedback and correction device has a positive effect on ambulatory trunk angles. The device appears to be both safe and useful for self-management of stooped posture in patients with Parkinson's Disease.

Background and Objective. Favorable prognosis of the upper limb depends on preservation or return of voluntary finger extension (FE) early after stroke. The present study aimed to determine the effects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) and electromyography-triggered neuromuscular stimulation (EMG-NMS) on upper limb capacity early poststroke. Methods. A total of 159 ischemic stroke patients were included: 58 patients with a favorable prognosis (>10° of FE) were randomly allocated to 3 weeks of mCIMT or usual care only; 101 patients with an unfavorable prognosis were allocated to 3-week EMG-NMS or usual care only. Both interventions started within 14 days poststroke, lasted up until 5 weeks, focused at preservation or return of FE. Results. Upper limb capacity was measured with the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), assessed weekly within the first 5 weeks poststroke and at postassessments at 8, 12, and 26 weeks. Clinically relevant differences in ARAT in favor of mCIMT were found after 5, 8, and 12 weeks poststroke (respectively, 6, 7, and 7 points; P