Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:33:38.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Editorial: Foreword for special issue on rehabilitation robotics and human–robot interaction – ROBOTICA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 November 2014

Panagiotis Artemiadis  and
Marco Santello
Panagiotis Artemiadis
Affiliation:
†School for Engineering of Matter, Transport and Energy, Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, Arizona State University 501 E. Tyler Mall, ECG 337, Tempe, AZ 85287-6106, USA
Marco Santello
Affiliation:
‡School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, Arizona State University 501 East Tyler Mall, ECG Building, Suite 334C, Tempe, AZ 85287-9709, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The demand for motor rehabilitation is growing apace with the graying of the population. The utilization of robotic devices in sensorimotor rehabilitation therapy has received increased attention during the last decade. Despite the growing interest in using robotic devices for rehabilitation of sensorimotor function, their widespread use remains somewhat limited by a number of factors, including the assessment of the true cost-to-benefit ratio relative to other types of rehabilitation approaches and parameters that would optimize their long-term efficacy. Understanding human sensorimotor control and brain plasticity can provide insight into the design of robot hardware and controllers with the appropriate reference or desired output. On the other hand, the control of the physical interaction of the therapeutic device with the subject to effectively accelerate recovery is of paramount importance. This special issue focuses on the current state of knowledge about sensorimotor control and brain plasticity, models of sensorimotor functional recovery, and use of intelligent robot controllers to provide robotic-assisted therapy for motor rehabilitation.

Type
Editorial
Information
Robotica , Volume 32 , Issue 8: Rehabilitation Robotics and Human-Robot Interaction , December 2014 , pp. 1189 - 1190
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

References

1.Lo, H. S. and Xie, S., “Optimization and analysis of a redundant 4R spherical wrist mechanism for a shoulder exoskeleton”, Robotica 32 (8), 1191–1211 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Ambrosini, E., Ferrante, S., Rossini, M., Molteni, F., Gföhler, M., Werner, D.-W., Alexander, F. and Alessandra, P. Giancarlo, “Functional and usability assessment of a robotic exoskeleton arm to support activities of daily life”, Robotica 32 (8), 1213–1224 (2014).Google Scholar
3.Lin, H.-C., Howard, M. and Vijayakumar, S., “A novel approach for representing and generalising periodic gaits”, Robotica 32 (8), 1225–1244 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Yoon, J., Oh, M.-K. and Pyo, S., “A novel robotic knee device with stance control and its kinematic weight optimization for rehabilitation” Robotica 32 (8), 1245–1263 (2014).Google Scholar
5.Fridin, M., Belokopytov, M., “Robotics agent coacher for CP motor function (RAC CP Fun)”, Robotica 32 (8), 1265–1279 (2014).Google Scholar
6.Ueda, J. and Henderson, G., “Pneumatically-powered robotic exercise device to induce a specific force profile in target lower extremity muscles”, Robotica 32 (8), 1281–1299 (2014).Google Scholar
7.Calanca, A. and Fiorini, P., “Human-adaptive control of series elastic actuators”, Robotica 32 (8), 1301–1316 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Vitiello, N., Martelli, D., Vannetti, F., Cortese, M., Tropea, P., Giovacchini, F., Micera, S. and Monaco, V., “The effects on biomechanics of walking and balance recovery in a novel pelvis exoskeleton during zero-torque control”, Robotica 32 (8), 1317–1330 (2014).Google Scholar
9.Amirabdollahian, F., Ates, S., Basteris, A., Cesario, A., Buurke, J., Hermens, H., Hofs, D., Johansson, E., Mountain, G., Nasr, N., Nijenhuis, S., Prange, G., Rahman, N., Sale, P., Schaetzlein, F., Schooten, B. and Stienen, A., “Design, development and deployment of a hand/wrist exoskeleton for home-based rehabilitation after stroke - SCRIPT project”, Robotica 32 (8), 1331–1346 (2014).Google Scholar
10.Cherelle, P., Junius, K., Grosu, V., Cuypers, H., Vanderborght, B. and Lefeber, D., “The AMP-foot 2.1 : actuator design, control and experiments with an amputee”, Robotica 32 (8), 1347–1361 (2014).Google Scholar
11.Patoglu, V., Ertas, I. and Hocaoglu, E., “AssistOn-finger: An under-actuated finger exoskeleton for robot-assisted tendon therapy”, Robotica 32 (8), 1363–1382 (2014).Google Scholar
12.Grow, D., Bastian, A. and Okamura, A., “Testing models of cerebellar ataxia via dynamics simulation”, Robotica 32 (8), 1383–1397 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.De Santis, D., Zenzeri, J., Casadio, M., Masia, L., Morasso, P. and Squeri, V., “A new method for evaluating kinesthetic acuity during haptic interaction”, Robotica 32 (8), 1399–1414 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Pehlivan, A., Sergi, F., Erwin, A., Yozbatiran, N., Francisco, G. and O'Malley, M. K., “Design and validation of the RiceWrist-S exoskeleton for robotic rehabilitation after incomplete spinal cord injury”, Robotica 32 (8), 1415–1431 (2014).Google Scholar
15.Patoglu, V., Sarac, M., Ergin, M. and Erdogan, A. “AssistOn-mobile: A series elastic holonomic mobile platform for upper extremity rehabilitation”, Robotica 32 (8), 1433–1459 (2014).Google Scholar