The Development and Evaluation of a Lightweight Underactuated RACA Hand Exoskeleton for Neurorehabilitation

Haroon Batra^1*, Laurel Blau² and Davina Hoffmann^1
*Correspondence: Haroon Batra, Department of Medicine, Rehabilitation Teaching & Research Unit, Ben Gurion University, Be’er Sheva, Israel, Email:

Keywords

Exoskeleton • Stroke rehabilitation • Underactuated mechanisms

Introduction

The advancement of exoskeletons for hand restoration has encountered critical development lately. Hand exoskeletons of altogether different sorts have been created in light of rules of: size, weight, levels of opportunity (DoF), adaptability, and dealing with capacities. Actuator type, mechanical plan and number of levels of opportunity, are vital perspectives in the plan of hand exoskeleton for recovery.

Cerebrovascular mishaps (stroke) are the second worldwide reason for death: just about 6 million individuals out of the 56.9 million passings overall in 2016, as per the World Wellbeing Association (WHO). Most stroke patients get by, however there is in many cases harm to the engine neuron after the intense period of the sickness. Stroke is the third driving reason for incapacity, and primarily influences people at the pinnacle of their useful life. Around 70 to 80 percent of the stroke survivors require long haul clinical consideration and live with a low quality of life. Around 60% of stroke survivors experience furthest point brokenness restricting cooperation in utilitarian exercises. Ongoing shortages are particularly common in the hand where long-lasting tangible as well as engine handicap comprises a significant issue. As a matter of fact, finger expansion is the engine capability probably going to be disabled. Further developing hand capability to advance useful recuperation is a significant errand for stroke restoration. Be that as it may, because of the accuracy and intricacy of capabilities, complete recuperation of hand capability is troublesome and slow in the recovery cycle. Restoration preparing can be sorted into the accompanying stages: intense, recovery and upkeep. It is perceived that the previous periods of restoration add to the recuperation of lost capacities and abilities. An answer for this issue would be a recovery emotionally supportive network that permitted patients to complete restoration practices. The utilization of mechanical gadgets in recovery is a promising strategy for the reclamation and relearning of engine capabilities, giving focused energy, tedious, task-explicit and intelligent treatment [1,2].

Literature Review

These exoskeleton gadgets address new plan difficulties for recovery designing since their DoFs should be lined up with the DOFs of the hand joints, to work on persistent's ease of use and compactness. Moreover, these gadgets should have the option to control the position or power applied at each joint. As of late, the IEC (Global Electrotechnical Commission) has distributed two guidelines in the field of clinical mechanical technology. One of them (IEC 80601-2-78) is straightforwardly material to automated gadgets for neuro restoration and it is predictable that, in the short and medium term, this standard will impact the turn of events, trial and error and commercialization of these gear. It is important for the IEC 60601 series of norms (Security and Fundamental Execution of Clinical Electrical Hardware) and it is the aftereffect of joint effort between ISO Specialized Board of trustees TC299 (Advanced mechanics) and IEC SubCommittee IEC/SC 62D (Electromedical gear) [3,4].

IEC 80601-2-78 "Clinical Electrical Hardware — Specific prerequisites for fundamental wellbeing and fundamental execution of clinical robots for Restoration, Evaluation, Pay or Mitigation (RACA)" is applied to clinical robots that actually cooperate with the patient to perform one of the four capabilities tended to in the standard. These gadgets are the purported RACA robots: "clinical robots planned by its maker to perform restoration, appraisal, remuneration or mitigation, involving an incited applied part". Exoskeletons for engine neuro restoration of the upper appendage are unequivocally mulled over in the report and are, consequently, liable to its proposals. After a stroke, numerous survivors show natural protection from hand expansion as spasticity as well as hypertonia, which prompts a decrease of the hand scope of movement (RoM). Muscle shortcoming is additionally present, to fluctuating degrees in most of stroke patients. In this paper we present the mechanical plan and the kinematic examination and its approval of RobHand, a novel underactuated neurorehabilitation automated hand exoskeleton. This gadget is planned to give paretic patients a mean of recovery to help and reestablish hand capabilities, by redundant hand opening and shutting practice restoration, which prompts working on the scope of movement and hand strength [5,6].

RobHand comprises of a back help stage with four straight actuators (for record, center, ring and little fingers), and a thumb module with one direct actuator. Each finger is moved by a mechanical subassembly formed by an underactuated linkage-turn component (with one middle piece and two bars: proximal and distal), which joints with an adaptable twofold ring, and sends the power of the direct actuator to the patient's finger during neurorehabilitation undertakings.

Discussion

As referenced beforehand, one of the most pertinent viewpoints in the new IEC standard is the presentation and formalization of the idea of Impelled Applied Part (AAP), characterized as: "Applied Part that is planned to furnish effectively controlled actual collaborations with the patient, that are connected with the patient's development capabilities, to carry out a clinical role of a RACA robot". RobHand's kinematic model unequivocally examines the estimation of the boundaries related with the AAPs of the gadget, which makes it more straightforward to characterize the appropriation of powers and forces applied and, accordingly, advance the connection with the patient, further developing security in the utilization of the hardware. We look at this as a clever methodology and that our review is quite possibly the earliest utilization of the IEC 80601-2-78 norm to a genuine framework [7].

The connection lengths of each mechanical subassembly have been intended to cover the work area of the finger joints, to accomplish the best presentation in the power transmission between the direct actuator and the finger and to permit flexion and augmentation finger developments.The exceptional qualities of versatility and assortment of thumb size drove us to plan a particular thumb mechanical module to appropriately situate both, the straight actuator and the mechanical components important to play out the thumb flexion and expansion. Because of hypertonia (spasticity), the paretic hand of hemiplegic patients is fastened into a clench hand at resting state. To guarantee that the gadget can be handily positioned in paretic hands an adaptable twofold ring join has been planned that permits the MCP and PIP developments. Adaptable twofold ring sets with three breadth sizes have been developed to adjust the gadget to the different human finger sizes (length and thickness). Because of the restricted scope of developments, an issue that emerges while utilizing an underactuated component is the trouble of accomplishing, with a similar mechanical design, both brace (flexion) developments and finger expansions or hyper-augmentations. For our situation we have utilized the kinematic model to refine the mechanical plan of the parts and to guarantee that the ongoing variant permits the two kinds of development [8].

Design requirements of RobHand

The human hand is profoundly expressed, prompting complex kinematics. Four fingers (file, center, ring and little) contain, from the fingertip to the center of the hand, three phalanges: the distal, the average (or middle of the road), and the proximal phalanx. They are associated by joints: distal interphalangeal (Plunge), proximal interphalangeal (PIP) and metatarsophalangeal (MCP). Plunge (1DoF) and PIP (1DoF) just have flexion/expansion developments. MCP (2DoFs) is a joint with the flexion/expansion and kidnapping/adduction developments. The thumb finger has just two phalanges (proximal and distal) and two joints (MCP and IP) [9]. As in the others fingers, the MCP has 2DoFs and the IP has 1DoF. Thumb's movement is additionally created by the carpometacarpal (CMC) joint. This joint permits many developments, including flexion and expansion, kidnapping and adduction, circumduction, and resistance. Altogether, the human hand has 19 joints and 23 DoFs. For configuration purposes we have demonstrated the human hand in a worked on way thinking about just a planar plan. That is, just finger flexion/ expansion developments have been thought of, disregarding snatching/ adduction developments. The gadget is just in touch with the proximal and average phalanges, passing on the distal phalanx free and gives help to the MCP and PIP joints of the five fingers. What's more, the point between the centre phalanx and the even is characterized as, essential for the formalization of the kinematic model. Positive points are considered for finger expansion development, and negative plots for finger flexion development.

Kinematic model

The hand is a complex utilitarian appendage including north of 30 muscles and in excess of 20 joints that permit playing out many exercises with an elevated degree of accuracy. Kinematics is fundamental for hand working. It means a lot to remember that, to ensure client wellbeing [10], humanexoskeleton kinematic similarity should be ensured in the plan stage and prior to undertaking different transformative phases. On the off chance that this similarity isn't accomplished, undesirable association powers might show up, essentially because of the misalignment between the exoskeleton and the human appendages, whose impact couldn't be repaid by the gadget actuators. A kinematic model has been created by characterizing mechanical shut circles with a bunch of conditions. They give the upsides of the MCP and PIP joints points of each finger, as capability of the stroke augmentation of the direct actuator.

Conclusion

This exploration proposes an original exoskeleton for hand restoration of hemiplegic stroke patients. It upholds expansion/flexion developments of the fingers by utilizing an under actuated linkage-pivot system that improves on the plan by utilizing a solitary direct actuator for each finger, bringing about lower gadget volume, weight and cost. The mechanical plan was a human-focused plan process, zeroed in on genuine client necessities. Because of spasticity, the paretic hand of numerous hemiplegic patients is caught into a clench hand at resting state. It is extremely challenging to expand the fingers of the patient to open the hand, and put on the exoskeleton. To take care of this issue, an adaptable twofold ring join has been planned. To guarantee the exoskeleton can be adjusted to various finger sizes, three twofold ring sets (little, medium and enormous sizes) have been developed to adjust to the calculation of every patient's finger. The thumb is the most mind boggling finger of the hand and has unique portability qualities of. Because of these reasons, it is challenging to guarantee both, its agreeable reconciliation in the exoskeleton, and that its developments are completed enough. We have fostered a straightforward component that effectively adjusts to the various sizes and length of the thumb, in view of the Noga LC6200 off-the-self gadget, which give a simple variation and mix of the thumb to the exoskeleton, accomplishing agreeable developments of the finger.

Acknowledgement

Not applicable.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interest by authors.

References

1. Nakayama, Hirofumi, Henrik Stig Jorgensen, Hans Otto Raaschou, and Tom Skyhoj Olsen. "Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study." Arch Phys Med Rehabil 75 (1994): 394-398.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Jonkman, E. J., A. W. De Weerd, and N. L. H. Vrijens. "Quality of life after a first ischemic stroke: Long‐term developments and correlations with changes in neurological deficit, mood and cognitive impairment." Acta Neurol Scand 98 (1998): 169-175.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. Johnson, Walter, Oyere Onuma, Mayowa Owolabi, and Sonal Sachdev. "Stroke: a global response is needed." Bulletin World Health Organ 94 (2016): 634.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

4. Galatz, Leesa M., Craig M. Ball, Sharlene A. Teefey, and William D. Middleton, et al. "The outcome and repair integrity of completely arthroscopically repaired large and massive rotator cuff tears." J Bone Joint Surg 86 (2004): 219-224.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Kwakkel, Gert, B. J. Kollen, and R. C. Wagenaar. "Long term effects of intensity of upper and lower limb training after stroke: a randomised trial." J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 72 (2002): 473-479.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

6. Flurin, P.H., P. Landreau, T. Gregory and P. Boileau, et al. "Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness cuff tears: a multicentric retrospective study of 576 cases with anatomical assessment." Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 91 (2005): 31-42.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

7. Ghodadra, Neil S., Matthew T. Provencher, Nikhil N. Verma and Kevin E. Wilk, et al. "Open, mini-open, and all-arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery: indications and implications for rehabilitation." J 39 (2009): 81-A6.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

8. Wade, D. T., R. Langton-Hewer, Victorine A. Wood, and C. E. Skilbeck, et al. "The hemiplegic arm after stroke: measurement and recovery." J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 46 (1983): 521-524.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

9. Aggogeri, Francesco, Tadeusz Mikolajczyk, and James O’Kane. "Robotics for rehabilitation of hand movement in stroke survivors." Adv Mech Eng 11 (2019).

Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Cuff, Derek J and Derek R. Pupello. "Prospective randomized study of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using an early vs. delayed postoperative physical therapy protocol." J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21 (2012): 1450-1455.

Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at