A Framework for Movement Analysis of Tasks: Recommendations From the Academy of Neurologic Physical Therapy's Movement System Task Force.

The American Physical Therapy Association's Vision Statement of 2013 asserts that physical therapists optimize movement in order to improve the human experience. In accordance with this vision, physical therapists strive to be recognized as experts in movement analysis. However, there continues to be no accepted method to conduct movement analysis, nor an agreement of key terminology to describe movement observations. As a result, the Academy of Neurologic Physical Therapy organized a task force that was charged with advancing the state of practice with respect to these issues, including the development of a proposed method for movement analysis of tasks. This paper presents the work of the Task Force, which includes (1) development of a method for conducting movement analysis within the context of the movement continuum during 6 core tasks (sitting, sit to stand, standing, walking, step up/down, and reach/grasp/manipulate); (2) glossary of movement constructs that can provide a common language for movement analysis across a range of tasks: symmetry, speed, amplitude, alignment, verticality, stability, smoothness, sequencing, timing, accuracy, and symptom provocation; and (3) recommendations for task and environmental variations that can be systematically applied. The expectation is that this systematic framework and accompanying terminology will be easily adapted to additional patient or client-specific tasks, contribute to development of movement system diagnostic labels, and ultimately improve consistency across patient/client examination, evaluation, and intervention for the physical therapy profession. Next steps should include validation of this framework across patient/client groups and settings.

Implementing Robotic-Assisted Gait Training in Acute Inpatient Stroke Rehabilitation: A Quality Improvement Initiative.

Background: The recovery of independent walking is one of the major goals of stroke rehabilitation; however, due to the current acute inpatient rehabilitation care paradigm, the intensity of walking practice provided has been far below that recommended for motor recovery to occur. A quality improvement initiative was implemented to encourage the physical therapist (PT) to incorporate various robotic gait training devices as part of the standard allotted PT sessions to improve the intensity of gait training. Materials and Methods: After 6 months, a retrospective review was performed to assess the feasibility of the robotic-assisted gait training (RAGT) intervention in limited-ambulatory stroke patients and determine preliminary efficacy of the RAGT program by analyzing Functional Index Measure (FIM) motor gain and accelerometer-based daily step counts in patients who received the RAGT versus a group treated with conventional therapy. Results: About 30% of limited-ambulatory patients admitted to the stroke rehabilitation unit received consistent integrated RAGT without safety concerns. Compared to those who received conventional treatment, these patients showed greater mean FIM motor gain (32.30 versus 17.88) at discharge (P < 0.005) and higher number of step counts in PT sessions (P < 0.005). Age, gender, or admission FIM motor were not associated with FIM motor gain. Conclusions: Across a 6-month initial implementation period, RAGT was feasible and was associated with higher repetition of walking practice and also with improved FIM motor scores in limited-ambulatory individuals in an acute inpatient stroke rehabilitation program. However, the frequency of RAGT and the percentage of patients participating need to further improve. Some strategies to address these concerns were identified.

The Importance of Voluntary Behavior in Rehabilitation Treatment and Outcomes.

Most rehabilitation treatments are volitional in nature, meaning that they require the patient's active engagement and effort. Volitional treatments are particularly challenging to define in a standardized fashion, because the clinician is not in complete control of the patient's role in enacting these treatments. Current recommendations for describing treatments in research reports fail to distinguish between 2 fundamentally different aspects of treatment design: the selection of treatment ingredients to produce the desired functional change and the selection of ingredients that will ensure the patient's volitional performance. The Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) is a conceptual scheme for standardizing the way that rehabilitation treatments are defined by all disciplines across all areas of rehabilitation. The RTSS highlights the importance of volitional behavior in many treatment areas and provides specific guidance for how volitional treatments should be specified. In doing so, it suggests important crosscutting research questions about the nature of volitional behavior, factors that make it more or less likely to occur, and ingredients that are most effective in ensuring that patients perform desired treatment activities.

A Theory-Driven System for the Specification of Rehabilitation Treatments.

The field of rehabilitation remains captive to the black-box problem: our inability to characterize treatments in a systematic fashion across diagnoses, settings, and disciplines, so as to identify and disseminate the active ingredients of those treatments. In this article, we describe the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS), by which any treatment employed in rehabilitation may be characterized, and ultimately classified according to shared properties, via the 3 elements of treatment theory: targets, ingredients, and (hypothesized) mechanisms of action. We discuss important concepts in the RTSS such as the distinction between treatments and treatment components, which consist of 1 target and its associated ingredients; and the distinction between targets, which are the direct effects of treatment, and aims, which are downstream or distal effects. The RTSS includes 3 groups of mutually exclusive treatment components: Organ Functions, Skills and Habits, and Representations. The last of these comprises not only thoughts and feelings, but also internal representations underlying volitional action; the RTSS addresses the concept of volition (effort) as a critical element for many rehabilitation treatments. We have developed an algorithm for treatment specification which is illustrated and described in brief. The RTSS stands to benefit the field in numerous ways by supplying a coherent, theory-based framework encompassing all rehabilitation treatments. Using a common framework, researchers will be able to test systematically the effects of specific ingredients on specific targets; and their work will be more readily replicated and translated into clinical practice.

Advancing Rehabilitation Practice Through Improved Specification of Interventions.

Rehabilitation clinicians strive to provide cost-effective, patient-centered care that optimizes outcomes. A barrier to this ideal is the lack of a universal system for describing, or specifying, rehabilitation interventions. Current methods of description vary across disciplines and settings, creating barriers to collaboration, and tend to focus mostly on functional deficits and anticipated outcomes, obscuring connections between clinician behaviors and changes in functioning. The Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) is the result of more than a decade of effort by a multidisciplinary group of rehabilitation clinicians and researchers to develop a theory-based framework to specify rehabilitation interventions. The RTSS describes interventions for treatment components, which consist of a target (functional change brought about as a direct result of treatment), ingredients (actions taken by clinicians to change the target), and a hypothesized mechanism of action, as stated in a treatment theory. The RTSS makes explicit the connections between functional change and clinician behavior, and recognizes the role of patient effort in treatment implementation. In so doing, the RTSS supports clinicians' efforts to work with their patients to set achievable goals, select appropriate treatments, adjust treatment plans as needed, encourage patient participation in the treatment process, communicate with team members, and translate research findings to clinical care. The RTSS may help both expert and novice clinicians articulate their clinical reasoning processes in ways that benefit treatment planning and clinical education, and may improve the design of clinical documentation systems, leading to more effective justification and reimbursement for services. Interested clinicians are invited to apply the RTSS in their local settings.

A Comparison of Locomotor Therapy Interventions: Partial-Body Weight-Supported Treadmill, Lokomat, and G-EO Training in People With Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Literature in the application of gait training techniques in persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI) is limited. Current techniques require multiple staff and are physically demanding. The use of a robotic locomotor training may provide improved training capacity for this population. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of 3 different modes of locomotor therapy on gait velocity and spatiotemporal symmetry using an end effector robot (G-EO); a robotic exoskeleton (Lokomat), and manual assisted partial-body weight-supported treadmill training (PBWSTT) in participants with traumatic brain injury. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective study. SETTING: Tertiary rehabilitation hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 22 individuals with ≥12 months chronic TBI with hemiparetic pattern able to walk overground without assistance at velocities between 0.2 and 0.6 m/s. INTERVENTION: Eighteen sessions of 45 minutes of assigned locomotor training. OUTCOME MEASURES: Overground walking self-selected velocity (SSV), maximal velocity (MV), spatiotemporal asymmetry ratio, 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), and mobility domain of Stroke Impact Scale (MSIS). RESULTS: Severity in walking dysfunction was similar across groups as determined by walking velocity data. At baseline, participants in the Lokomat group had a baseline velocity that was slightly slower compared with the other groups. Training elicited a statistically significant median increase in SSV for all groups compared with pretraining (Lokomat, P = .04; G-EO, P = .03; and PBWSTT, P = .02) and MV excluding the G-EO group (Lokomat, P = .04; PBWSTT, P = .03 and G-EO, P = .15). There were no pre-post significant differences in swing time, stance time, and step length asymmetry ratios at SSV or MV for any of the interventions. Mean rank in the change of SSV and MV was not statistically significantly different between groups. Participants in the G-EO and PBWSTT groups significantly improved their 6MWT posttraining (P = .04 and .03, respectively). The MSIS significantly improved only for the Lokomat group (P = .04 and .03). The data did not elicit between-groups significant differences for 6MWT and MSIS. There was less use of staff for Lokomat than G-EO. CONCLUSIONS: Locomotor therapy using G-EO, Lokomat, or PBWSTT in individuals with chronic TBI increased SSV and MV without significant changes in gait symmetry. Staffing needed for therapy provision was the least for the Lokomat. A larger study may further elucidate changes in gait symmetry and other training parameters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Effects of traumatic brain injury on locomotor adaptation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Locomotor adaptation is a form of short-term learning that enables gait modifications and reduces movement errors when the environment changes. This adaptation is critical for community ambulation for example, when walking on different surfaces. While many individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) recover basic ambulation, less is known about recovery of more complex locomotor skills, like adaptation. The purpose of this study was to investigate how TBI affects locomotor adaptation. METHODS: Fourteen adults with TBI and 11 nondisabled comparison participants walked for 15 minutes on a split-belt treadmill with 1 belt moving at 0.7 m/s, and the other at 1.4 m/s. Subsequently, aftereffects were assessed and de-adapted during 15 minutes of tied-belt walking (both belts at 0.7 m/s). RESULTS: Participants with TBI showed greater asymmetry in interlimb coordination on split-belts than the comparison group. Those with TBI did not adapt back to baseline symmetry, and some individuals did not store significant aftereffects. Greater asymmetry on split-belts and smaller aftereffects were associated with greater ataxia. DISCUSSION: Participants with TBI were more perturbed by walking on split-belts and showed some impairment in adaptation. This suggests a reduced ability to learn a new form of coordination to compensate for environmental changes. Multiple interacting factors, including cerebellar damage and impairments in higher-level cognitive processes, may influence adaptation post-TBI. CONCLUSIONS: Gait adaptation to novel environment demands is impaired in persons with chronic TBI and may be an important skill to target in rehabilitation. VIDEO ABSTRACT AVAILABLE: (See Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A74) for more insights from the authors.

Development of a theory-driven rehabilitation treatment taxonomy: conceptual issues.

Many rehabilitation treatment interventions, unlike pharmacologic treatments, are not operationally defined, and the labels given to such treatments do not specify the active ingredients that produce the intended treatment effects. This, in turn, limits the ability to study and disseminate treatments, to communicate about them clearly, or to train new clinicians to administer them appropriately. We sought to begin the development of a system of classification of rehabilitation treatments and services that is based on their active ingredients. To do this, we reviewed a range of published descriptions of rehabilitation treatments and treatments that were familiar to the authors from their clinical and research experience. These treatment examples were used to develop preliminary rules for defining discrete treatments, identifying the area of function they directly treat, and identifying their active ingredients. These preliminary rules were then tested against additional treatment examples, and problems in their application were used to revise the rules in an iterative fashion. The following concepts, which emerged from this process, are defined and discussed in relation with the development of a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy: rehabilitation treatment taxonomy; treatment and enablement theory; recipient (of treatment); essential, active, and inactive ingredients; mechanism of action; targets and aims of treatment; session; progression; dosing parameters; and social and physical environment. It is hoped that articulation of the conceptual issues encountered during this project will be useful to others attempting to promote theory-based discussion of rehabilitation effects and that multidisciplinary discussion and research will further refine these rules and definitions to advance rehabilitation treatment classification.

Toward a theory-driven classification of rehabilitation treatments.

Rehabilitation is in need of an organized system or taxonomy for classifying treatments to aid in research, practice, training, and interdisciplinary communication. In this article, we describe a work-in-progress effort to create a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy (RTT) for classifying rehabilitation interventions by the underlying treatment theories that explain their effects. In the RTT, treatments are grouped together according to their targets, or measurable aspects of functioning they are intended to change; ingredients, or measurable clinician decisions and behaviors responsible for effecting changes; and the hypothesized mechanisms of action by which ingredients are transformed into changes in the target. Four treatment groupings are proposed: structural tissue properties, organ functions, skilled performances, and cognitive/affective representations, which are similar in the types of targets addressed, ingredients used, and mechanisms of action that account for change. The typical ingredients and examples of clinical treatments associated with each of these groupings are explored, and the challenges of further subdivision are discussed. Although a Linnaean hierarchical tree structure was envisioned at the outset of work on the RTT, further development may necessitate a model with less rigid boundaries between classification groups, and/or a matrix-like structure for organizing active ingredients along selected continua, to allow for both qualitative and quantitative variations of importance to treatment effects.

Rehabilitation treatment taxonomy: implications and continuations.

In relation to the conceptual framework for a rehabilitation treatment taxonomy (RTT), which has been proposed in other articles in this supplement, this article discusses a number of issues relevant to its further development, including creating distinctions within the major target classes; the nature and quantity of allowable targets of treatment; and bracketing as a way of specifying (1) the skill or knowledge taught; (2) the nature of compensation afforded by changes in the environment, assistive technology, and orthotics/prosthetics; and (3) the ingredients in homework a clinician assigns. Clarification is provided regarding the role of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, focusing a taxonomy on ingredients versus other observable aspects of treatment, and regarding our lack of knowledge and its impact on taxonomy development. Finally, this article discusses the immediate implications of the work to date and presents the need for rehabilitation stakeholders of all disciplines to be involved in further RTT development.

A randomized comparative study of manually assisted versus robotic-assisted body weight supported treadmill training in persons with a traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To compare the effects of robotic-assisted treadmill training (RATT) and manually assisted treadmill training (MATT) in participants with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and (2) to determine the potential impact on the symmetry of temporal walking parameters, 6-minute walk test, and the mobility domain of the Stroke Impact Scale, version 3.0 (SIS). DESIGN: Randomized prospective study. SUBJECTS: A total of 16 participants with TBI and a baseline over ground walking self-selected velocity (SSV) of ≥0.2 m/s to 0.6 m/s randomly assigned to either the RATT or MATT group. INTERVENTION: Gait training for 45 minutes, 3 times a week with either RATT or MATT for a total of 18 training sessions. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: Overground walking SSV, maximal velocity. Secondary: Spatiotemporal symmetry, 6-minute walk test, and SIS. RESULTS: Between-group differences were not statistically significant for any measure. However, from pretraining to post-training, the average SSV increased by 49.8% for the RATT group (P = .01) and by 31% for MATT group (P = .06). The average maximal velocity increased by 14.9% for the RATT group (P = .06) and by 30.8% for the MATT group (P = .01). Less staffing and effort was needed for RATT in this study. Step-length asymmetry ratio improved during SSV by 33.1% for the RATT group (P = .01) and by 9.1% for the MATT group (P = .73). The distance walked increased by 11.7% for the robotic group (P = .21) and by 19.3% for manual group (P = .03). A statistically significant improvement in the mobility domain of the SIS was found for both groups (P ≤ .03). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate greater improvement in symmetry of gait (step length) for RATT and no significant differences between RATT and MATT with regard to improvement in gait velocity, endurance, and SIS. Our study provides evidence that participants with a chronic TBI can experience improvements in gait parameters with gait training with either MATT or RATT.

The ReWalk powered exoskeleton to restore ambulatory function to individuals with thoracic-level motor-complete spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and performance of ReWalk in enabling people with paraplegia due to spinal cord injury to carry out routine ambulatory functions. DESIGN: This was an open, noncomparative, nonrandomized study of the safety and performance of the ReWalk powered exoskeleton. All 12 subjects have completed the active intervention; three remain in long-term follow-up. RESULTS: After training, all subjects were able to independently transfer and walk, without human assistance while using the ReWalk, for at least 50 to 100 m continuously, for a period of at least 5 to 10 mins continuously and with velocities ranging from 0.03 to 0.45 m/sec (mean, 0.25 m/sec). Excluding two subjects with considerably reduced walking abilities, average distances and velocities improved significantly. Some subjects reported improvements in pain, bowel and bladder function, and spasticity during the trial. All subjects had strong positive comments regarding the emotional/psychosocial benefits of the use of ReWalk. CONCLUSIONS: ReWalk holds considerable potential as a safe ambulatory powered orthosis for motor-complete thoracic-level spinal cord injury patients. Most subjects achieved a level of walking proficiency close to that needed for limited community ambulation. A high degree of performance variability was observed across individuals. Some of this variability was explained by level of injury, but other factors have not been completely identified. Further development and application of this rehabilitation tool to other diagnoses are expected in the future.

Robotic-assisted gait training and restoration.

The past two decades have seen the introduction of and a strong growth in the availability of rehabilitation interventions that are based on the use of robotics. A major driving factor has been the advancement of technology, with faster, more powerful computers, new computational approaches, as well as increased sophistication of motors and other electro mechanical components. These advancements in technology have not been the only factor propelling these new rehabilitation interventions. During the same period, a strong growth in the understanding of neuroplasticity and motor learning has also been witnessed. Although there is still much to learn, comprehension of how new skills are acquired, or old ones are relearned, is evolving at a fast pace. Much of this improved understanding can be linked to the advancement of central nervous system imaging as well as techniques for studying changes at the cellular or molecular level. In this review, the authors present the notion that an ever-advancing understanding of neuroplasticity and motor learning can provide a theoretical basis for the clinical use of rehabilitation robotics as applied to enhancing mobility. Specifically focusing on locomotor training after injury to the central nervous system, these principles can provide guidance to clinicians on how to structure their interventions to potentially promote or accelerate functional recovery in their patients. Several types of existing robotic devices to assist walking that are currently available for use in the clinic, as well as their advantages and limitations, will be discussed.