Towards a validated glossary of usability attributes for the evaluation of wearable robotic devices.

BACKGROUND: Despite technical advances in the field of wearable robotic devices (WRD), there is still limited user acceptance of these technologies. While usability often comes as a key factor influencing acceptance, there is a scattered landscape of definitions and scopes for the term. To advance usability evaluation, and to integrate usability features as design requirements during technology development, there is a need for benchmarks and shared terminology. These should be easily accessible and implementable by developers. METHODS: An initial set of usability attributes (UA) was extracted from a literature survey on usability evaluation in WRD. The initial set of attributes was enriched and locally validated with seven developers of WRD through an online survey and a focus group. The locally validated glossary was then externally validated through a globally distributed online survey. RESULTS: The result is the Robotics Usability Glossary (RUG), a comprehensive glossary of 41 UA validated by 70 WRD developers from 17 countries, ensuring its generalizability. 31 of the UA had high agreement scores among respondents and 27 were considered highly relevant in the field, but only 11 of them had been included as design criteria by the respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple UA ought to be considered for a comprehensive usability assessment. Usability remains inadequately incorporated into device development, indicating a need for increased awareness and end-user perspective. The RUG can be readily accessed through an online platform, the Interactive Usability Toolbox (IUT), developed to provide context-specific outcome measures and usability evaluation methods. Overall, this effort is an important step towards improving and promoting usability evaluation practices within WRD. It has the potential to pave the way for establishing usability evaluation benchmarks that further endorse the acceptance of WRD.

A qualitative study to elicit user requirements for lower limb wearable exoskeletons for gait rehabilitation in spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to determine a comprehensive set of requirements, perceptions, and expectations that people with spinal cord injury (SCI) and the clinicians in charge of their rehabilitation have regarding the use of wearable robots (WR) for gait rehabilitation. BACKGROUND: There are concerns due to the limited user acceptance of WR for gait rehabilitation. Developers need to emphasize understanding the needs and constraints of all stakeholders involved, including the real-life dynamics of rehabilitation centers. METHODS: 15 people with SCI, 9 without experience with WR and 6 with experience with these technologies, and 10 clinicians from 3 rehabilitation centers in Spain were interviewed. A directed content analysis approach was used. RESULTS: 78 codes grouped into 9 categories (physical results, usability, psychology-related codes, technical characteristics, activities, acquisition issues, context of use, development of the technologies and clinical rehabilitation context) were expressed by at least 20% of the users interviewed, of whom 16 were not found in the literature. The agreement percentage between each group and subgroup included in the study, calculated as the number of codes that more than 20% of both groups expressed, divided over the total amount of codes any of those two groups agreed on (≥ 20%), showed limited agreement between patients and clinicians (50.00%) and between both types of patients (55.77%). The limited accessibility and availability of lower limb exoskeletons for gait rehabilitation arose in most of the interviews. CONCLUSIONS: The limited agreement percentage between patients and clinicians indicates that including both types of users in the design process of these technologies is important, given that their requirements are complementary. Engaging users with prior technology experience is recommended, as they often exhibit strong internal consensus and articulate well-defined requirements. This study adds up the knowledge available in the literature and the new codes found in our data, which enlighten important aspects that ought to be addressed in the field to develop technologies that respond to users' needs, are usable and feasible to implement in their intended contexts. APPLICATION: The set of criteria summarized in our study will be useful to guide the design, development, and evaluation of WR for gait rehabilitation to meet user's needs and allow them to be implemented in their intended context of use.

Construct Validity of the Gait Deviation Index for People With Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury (GDI-SCI).

BACKGROUND: The Gait Deviation Index for Spinal Cord Injury (SCI-GDI) was recently proposed as a dimensionless multivariate kinematic measure based on 21 gait features derived from 3-dimensional kinematic data which quantifies gait impairment of adult population with incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) relative to the normative gait of a healthy group. Nevertheless, no validity studies of the SCI-GDI have been published to date. OBJECTIVE: To assess the construct validity of the SCI-GDI in adult population following iSCI. Methods. SCI-GDI data were obtained from a sample of 50 healthy volunteers and 35 adults with iSCI. iSCI group was also assessed with the following measures: 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT) at both self-selected (SS) and maximum speeds, Timed Up and Go Test (TUGT), SS and maximum levels of the Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury (WISCI) II, mobility items of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (SCIM IIIIOMob), Lower Extremity Motor Score (LEMS), and Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS). Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to investigate the relationship with the SCI-GDI. RESULTS: SCI-GDI shows strong correlation with the 10MWT (r ≥ -.716) and good correlation with LEMS (r = .638), TUGT (r = -.582), SS WISCI II levels (r = .521), and SCIM IIIIOMob (r = .501). No significant correlations were found with maximum WISCI II levels and MAS (P > .006). CONCLUSIONS: Construct validity of the SCI-GDI was demonstrated with the 10MWT, TUGT, LEMS, SCIM IIIIOMob, and SS WISCI II levels for independently walking adults with iSCI. Future work will include assessing the psychometric characteristics with a more heterogeneous sample, also considering the pediatric population.

Derivation of the Gait Deviation Index for Spinal Cord Injury.

The Gait Deviation Index (GDI) is a dimensionless multivariate measure of overall gait pathology represented as a single score that indicates the gait deviation from a normal gait average. It is calculated using kinematic data recorded during a three-dimensional gait analysis and an orthonormal vectorial basis with 15 gait features that was originally obtained using singular value decomposition and feature analysis on a dataset of children with cerebral palsy. Ever since, it has been used as an outcome measure to study gait in several conditions, including spinal cord injury (SCI). Nevertheless, the validity of implementing the GDI in a population with SCI has not been studied yet. We investigate the application of these mathematical methods to derive a similar metric but with a dataset of adults with SCI (SCI-GDI). The new SCI-GDI is compared with the original GDI to evaluate their differences and assess the need for a specific GDI for SCI and with the WISCI II to evaluate its sensibility. Our findings show that a 21-feature basis is necessary to account for most of the variance in gait patterns in the SCI population and to provide high-quality reconstructions of the gait curves included in the dataset and in foreign data. Furthermore, using only the first 15 features of our SCI basis, the fidelity of the reconstructions obtained in our population is higher than that when using the basis of the original GDI. The results showed that the SCI-GDI discriminates most levels of the WISCI II scale, except for levels 12 and 18. Statistically significant differences were found between both indexes within each WISCI II level except for 12, 20, and the control group (p < 0.05). In all levels, the average GDI value was greater than the average SCI-GDI value, but the difference between both indexes is larger in data with greater impairment and it reduces progressively toward a normal gait pattern. In conclusion, the implementation of the original GDI in SCI may lead to overestimation of gait function, and our new SCI-GDI is more sensitive to larger gait impairment than the GDI. Further validation of the SCI-GDI with other scales validated in SCI is needed.

Application of the Gait Deviation Index to Study Gait Impairment in Adult Population With Spinal Cord Injury: Comparison With the Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury Levels.

The Gait Deviation Index (GDI) is a multivariate measure of overall gait pathology based on 15 gait features derived from three-dimensional (3D) kinematic data. GDI aims at providing a comprehensive, easy to interpret, and clinically meaningful metric of overall gait function. It has been used as an outcome measure to study gait in several conditions: cerebral palsy (CP), post-stroke hemiparetic gait, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and Parkinson's disease, among others. Nevertheless, its use in population with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) has not been studied yet. The aim of the present study was to investigate the applicability of the GDI to SCI through the assessment of the relationship of the GDI with the Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury (WISCI) II. 3D gait kinematics of 34 patients with incomplete SCI (iSCI) was obtained. Besides, 3D gait kinematics of a sample of 50 healthy volunteers (HV) was also gathered with Codamotion motion capture system. A total of 302 (iSCI) and 446 (HV) strides were collected. GDI was calculated for each stride and grouped for each WISCI II level. HV data were analyzed as an additional set. Normal distribution for each group was assessed with Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. Afterward, ANOVA tests were performed between each pair of WISCI II levels to identify differences among groups (p < 0.05). The results showed that the GDI was normally distributed across all WISCI II levels in both iSCI and HV groups. Furthermore, our results showed an increasing relationship between the GDI values and WISCI II levels in subjects with iSCI, but only discriminative in WISCI II levels 13, 19, and 20. The index successfully distinguished HV group from all the individuals with iSCI. Findings of this study indicated that the GDI is not an appropriate multivariate walking metric to represent the deviation of gait pattern in adult population with iSCI from a normal gait profile when it is compared with the levels of walking impairment described by the WISCI II. Future work should aim at defining and validating an overall gait index derived from 3D kinematic gait variables appropriate for SCI, additionally taking into account other walking ability outcome measures.

Influences of the biofeedback content on robotic post-stroke gait rehabilitation: electromyographic vs joint torque biofeedback.

BACKGROUND: Add-on robot-mediated therapy has proven to be more effective than conventional therapy alone in post-stroke gait rehabilitation. Such robot-mediated interventions routinely use also visual biofeedback tools. A better understanding of biofeedback content effects when used for robotic locomotor training may improve the rehabilitation process and outcomes. METHODS: This randomized cross-over pilot trial aimed to address the possible impact of different biofeedback contents on patients' performance and experience during Lokomat training, by comparing a novel biofeedback based on online biological electromyographic information (EMGb) versus the commercial joint torque biofeedback (Rb) in sub-acute non ambulatory patients. 12 patients were randomized into two treatment groups, A and B, based on two different biofeedback training. For both groups, study protocol consisted of 12 Lokomat sessions, 6 for each biofeedback condition, 40 min each, 3 sessions per week of frequency. All patients performed Lokomat trainings as an add-on therapy to the conventional one that was the same for both groups and consisted of 40 min per day, 5 days per week. The primary outcome was the Modified Ashworth Spasticity Scale, and secondary outcomes included clinical, neurological, mechanical, and personal experience variables collected before and after each biofeedback training. RESULTS: Lokomat training significantly improved gait/daily living activity independence and trunk control, nevertheless, different effects due to biofeedback content were remarked. EMGb was more effective to reduce spasticity and improve muscle force at the ankle, knee and hip joints. Robot data suggest that Rb induces more adaptation to robotic movements than EMGb. Furthermore, Rb was perceived less demanding than EMGb, even though patient motivation was higher for EMGb. Robot was perceived to be effective, easy to use, reliable and safe: acceptability was rated as very high by all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Specific effects can be related to biofeedback content: when muscular-based information is used, a more direct effect on lower limb spasticity and muscle activity is evidenced. In a similar manner, when biofeedback treatment is based on joint torque data, a higher patient compliance effect in terms of force exerted is achieved. Subjects who underwent EMGb seemed to be more motivated than those treated with Rb.

Una actualización sobre aplicaciones ortopédicas usando tecnologías de impresión tridimensional / An Update on Orthopedic Applications Using 3-Dimensional Printing Technologies / Uma atualização em aplicações ortopédicas usando tecnologias de impressão tridimensionais

Resumen En este artículo se revisan las aplicaciones tecnológicas de la impresión tridimensional (3DP) en Ortopedia. La impresión 3D es el proceso de manufacturar para construir objetos tridimensionales a través de la acumulación de material, y recientemente está llamando la atención de profesionales médicos de forma significativa. La Ortopedia es probablemente la mayor área de aplicación de esta tecnología, y está siendo probada en diversos procedimientos, desde hacer planeación quirúrgica hasta manufacturar implantes para probar su utilidad. Sin embargo, esta tecnología no ha superado completamente los problemas que surgieron en la década de los noventa, estas limitaciones serán superadas eventualmente cuando la velocidad del desarrollo tecnológico sea considerada.

Abstract This article reviews the technological applications of 3-dimensional printing (3DP) in orthopedics. 3DP is the manufacturing process to build three-dimensional object by accumulating material, and recently it is drawing the interest of medical professional significantly. Orthopedics is probably the biggest application of this technology, and is being tested from surgical planning to the implant manufacturing to prove its usefulness. The technology has not overcome the problems that arose in the 90s completely, those limitations will be overcome eventually, when the technological development speed is considered.

Resumo Este artigo descreve as aplicações tecnológicas da impressão tridimensional (3DP) em Ortopedia. Impressão 3D é o processo de manufatura para construir objectos tridimensionais, através da acumulação de material. Recentemente elas estao atraindo significativamente a atenção dos profissionais médicos. A Ortopedia é provavelmente a maior área de aplicação desta tecnologia, e está sendo testado em vários processos, desde o planejamento cirúrgico até a fabricação de implantes cirúrgicos para provar a sua utilidade. No entanto, esta tecnologia não foi consigue superar completamente os problemas que surgiram na década dos noventa. Essas limitações serao superadas quando a velocidade do desenvolvimento tecnológico seja considerado.