Development and Electromyographic Validation of a Compliant Human-Robot Interaction Controller for Cooperative and Personalized Neurorehabilitation.
compliant control
electromyography
human robotics
impedance control
neurorehabilitation
physical human-robot interaction
Journal
Frontiers in neurorobotics
ISSN: 1662-5218
Titre abrégé: Front Neurorobot
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101477958
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
30
06
2021
accepted:
12
11
2021
entrez:
4
2
2022
pubmed:
5
2
2022
medline:
5
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Appropriate training modalities for post-stroke upper-limb rehabilitation are key features for effective recovery after the acute event. This study presents a cooperative control framework that promotes compliant motion and implements a variety of high-level rehabilitation modalities with a unified low-level explicit impedance control law. The core idea is that we can change the haptic behavior perceived by a human when interacting with the rehabilitation robot by tuning three impedance control parameters. The presented control law is based on an impedance controller with direct torque measurement, provided with positive-feedback compensation terms for disturbances rejection and gravity compensation. We developed an elbow flexion-extension experimental setup as a platform to validate the performance of the proposed controller to promote the desired high-level behavior. The controller was first characterized through experimental trials regarding joint transparency, torque, and impedance tracking accuracy. Then, to validate if the controller could effectively render different physical human-robot interaction according to the selected rehabilitation modalities, we conducted tests on 14 healthy volunteers and measured their muscular voluntary effort through surface electromyography (sEMG). The experiments consisted of one degree-of-freedom elbow flexion/extension movements, executed under six high-level modalities, characterized by different levels of (i) corrective assistance, (ii) weight counterbalance assistance, and (iii) resistance. The unified controller demonstrated suitability to promote good transparency and render both compliant and stiff behavior at the joint. We demonstrated through electromyographic monitoring that a proper combination of stiffness, damping, and weight assistance could induce different user participation levels, render different physical human-robot interaction, and potentially promote different rehabilitation training modalities. We proved that the proposed control framework could render a wide variety of physical human-robot interaction, helping the user to accomplish the task while exploiting physiological muscular activation patterns. The reported results confirmed that the control scheme could induce different levels of the subject's participation, potentially applicable to the clinical practice to adapt the rehabilitation treatment to the subject's progress. Further investigation is needed to validate the presented approach to neurological patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Appropriate training modalities for post-stroke upper-limb rehabilitation are key features for effective recovery after the acute event. This study presents a cooperative control framework that promotes compliant motion and implements a variety of high-level rehabilitation modalities with a unified low-level explicit impedance control law. The core idea is that we can change the haptic behavior perceived by a human when interacting with the rehabilitation robot by tuning three impedance control parameters.
METHODS
METHODS
The presented control law is based on an impedance controller with direct torque measurement, provided with positive-feedback compensation terms for disturbances rejection and gravity compensation. We developed an elbow flexion-extension experimental setup as a platform to validate the performance of the proposed controller to promote the desired high-level behavior. The controller was first characterized through experimental trials regarding joint transparency, torque, and impedance tracking accuracy. Then, to validate if the controller could effectively render different physical human-robot interaction according to the selected rehabilitation modalities, we conducted tests on 14 healthy volunteers and measured their muscular voluntary effort through surface electromyography (sEMG). The experiments consisted of one degree-of-freedom elbow flexion/extension movements, executed under six high-level modalities, characterized by different levels of (i) corrective assistance, (ii) weight counterbalance assistance, and (iii) resistance.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The unified controller demonstrated suitability to promote good transparency and render both compliant and stiff behavior at the joint. We demonstrated through electromyographic monitoring that a proper combination of stiffness, damping, and weight assistance could induce different user participation levels, render different physical human-robot interaction, and potentially promote different rehabilitation training modalities.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
We proved that the proposed control framework could render a wide variety of physical human-robot interaction, helping the user to accomplish the task while exploiting physiological muscular activation patterns. The reported results confirmed that the control scheme could induce different levels of the subject's participation, potentially applicable to the clinical practice to adapt the rehabilitation treatment to the subject's progress. Further investigation is needed to validate the presented approach to neurological patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35115915
doi: 10.3389/fnbot.2021.734130
pmc: PMC8804356
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
734130Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Dalla Gasperina, Longatelli, Braghin, Pedrocchi and Gandolla.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
SD, FB, AP, and MG hold shares in AGADE srl, Milan, Italy. The remaining author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
J Phys Ther Sci. 2017 Jun;29(6):1108-1112
pubmed: 28626337
J Neurosci. 1984 Nov;4(11):2745-54
pubmed: 6502203
Malawi Med J. 2012 Sep;24(3):69-71
pubmed: 23638278
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2020 Jun 30;17(1):83
pubmed: 32605587
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 Apr 30;13(1):42
pubmed: 27130577
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017 Feb;31(2):107-121
pubmed: 27597165
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Apr 13;96(8):4645-9
pubmed: 10200316
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Nov 07;(11):CD006876
pubmed: 26559225
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2010;2010:4489-93
pubmed: 21095778
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Feb;88(2):142-9
pubmed: 17270510
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2009 Jun 16;6:20
pubmed: 19531254
Stroke. 2016 Jun;47(6):e98-e169
pubmed: 27145936
J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2005 Aug;15(4):384-92
pubmed: 15811609
Lancet Neurol. 2019 May;18(5):417-418
pubmed: 30871943
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2015 Jan;23(1):84-92
pubmed: 24919202
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2009 Feb 25;6:5
pubmed: 19243614
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2013 Mar;21(2):283-8
pubmed: 23096118
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2011 Oct;49(10):1213-23
pubmed: 21796422
Front Robot AI. 2018 Jun 21;5:72
pubmed: 33500951
IEEE Trans Robot. 2019 Dec;35(6):1464-1474
pubmed: 31929766
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 14;11:CD006073
pubmed: 27841442
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2016 Nov;24(11):1179-1190
pubmed: 26890912
Front Neurorobot. 2018 Mar 19;12:10
pubmed: 29615890
Front Neurol. 2018 Aug 07;9:630
pubmed: 30131756
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2020 Feb 5;17(1):13
pubmed: 32024528
Med Biol Eng. 1972 Jul;10(4):450-9
pubmed: 5074848
Med Biol Eng Comput. 2007 Sep;45(9):887-900
pubmed: 17674069
IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot. 2013 Jun;2013:6650404
pubmed: 24187223
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2008 Jun;16(3):286-97
pubmed: 18586608
Front Neurol. 2019 Apr 24;10:412
pubmed: 31068898
Bull World Health Organ. 2016 Sep 1;94(9):634-634A
pubmed: 27708464
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Jul 10;11:111
pubmed: 25012864
IEEE Rev Biomed Eng. 2016;9:4-14
pubmed: 27071194
IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot. 2017 Jul;2017:72-77
pubmed: 28813796
Curr Opin Neurol. 2006 Feb;19(1):84-90
pubmed: 16415682