Experimental verification of a completely soft gripper for grasping and classifying beam members in truss structures

© 2018 IEEE. Robotic object exploration and identification methods to date have attempted to mimic human Exploratory Procedures (EPs) using complex, rigid robotic hands with multifaceted sensory suites. For applications where the target objects may have different or unknown cross-sectional shapes and sizes (e.g. beam members in truss structures), rigid grippers are not a good option as they are unable to adapt to the target objects. This may make it very difficult to recognise the shape and size of a beam member and the approaching angles which would result in a secure grasp. To best meet the requirements of adaptability and compliancy, a soft robotic gripper with simple exteroceptive force sensors has been designed. This paper experimentally verifies the gripper design by assessing its performance in grasping and adapting to a variety of target beam members in a truss structure. The sensor arrangement is also assessed by verifying that sufficient data is extracted during a grasp to recognise the approaching angle of the gripper. Firstly, the gripper is used to grasp each beam member from various angles of approach and readings from the force sensors are collected. Secondly, the collected sensor data is used to train and then test a range of commonly used classifiers for classification of the angle of approach. Thirdly, the classification results are analysed. Through this process, it is found that the gripper is proficient in grasping the variety of target beam members. Despite the uncertainty in the gripper pose, the sensor data collected from the soft gripper during a grasp is sufficient for classification of the angles of approach

2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: An American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative

Objective The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly, the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticized for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA. Methods A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in 3 phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease—this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct “rheumatoid arthritis.” Results In the new criteria set, classification as “definite RA” is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least 1 joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis that better explains the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in 4 domains: number and site of involved joints (score range 0–5), serologic abnormality (score range 0–3), elevated acute-phase response (score range 0–1), and symptom duration (2 levels; range 0–1). Conclusion This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimize the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct “rheumatoid arthritis.”Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78045/1/27584_ftp.pd

Multinational evidence-based recommendations on how to investigate and follow-up undifferentiated peripheral inflammatory arthritis: integrating systematic literature research and expert opinion of a broad international panel of rheumatologists in the 3E Initiative

Methods: 697 rheumatologists from 17 countries participated in the 3E (Evidence, Expertise, Exchange) Initiative of 2008–9 consisting of three separate rounds of discussions and modified Delphi votes. In the first round 10 clinical questions were selected. A bibliographic team systematically searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and ACR/EULAR 2007–2008 meeting abstracts. Relevant articles were reviewed for quality assessment, data extraction and synthesis. In the second round each country elaborated a set of national recommendations. Finally, multinational recommendations were formulated and agreement among the participants and the potential impact on their clinical practice was assessed. Results: A total of 39 756 references were identified, of which 250 were systematically reviewed. Ten multinational key recommendations about the investigation and follow-up of UPIA were formulated. One recommendation addressed differential diagnosis and investigations prior to establishing the operational diagnosis of UPIA, seven recommendations related to the diagnostic and prognostic value of clinical and laboratory assessments in established UPIA (history and physical examination, acute phase reactants, autoantibodies, radiographs, MRI and ultrasound, genetic markers and synovial biopsy), one recommendation highlighted predictors of persistence (chronicity) and the final recommendation addressed monitoring of clinical disease activity in UPIA. Conclusions: Ten recommendations on how to investigate and follow-up UPIA in the clinical setting were developed. They are evidence-based and supported by a large panel of rheumatologists, thus enhancing their validity and practical use

Patients' independence of a nurse for the administration of subcutaneous anti-TNF therapy: A phenomenographic study

Rheumatology nursing supports patients to manage their lives and live as independently as possible without pain, stiffness and functional restrictions. When conventional drugs fail to delay the development of the rheumatic disease, the patient may require biological treatment such as self-administered subcutaneous anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy. It is therefore important that the patient perspective focuses on the life-changing situation caused by the administration of regular subcutaneous injections. The aim of this study was to describe variations in how patients with rheumatic diseases experience their independence of a nurse for administration of subcutaneous anti-TNF therapy. The study had a descriptive, qualitative design with a phenomenographic approach and was carried out by means of 20 interviews. Four ways of understanding the patients' experience of their subcutaneous anti-TNF therapy and independence of a nurse emerged: the struggling patient; the learning patient; the participating patient; the independent patient. Achieving independence of a nurse for subcutaneous anti-TNF injections can be understood by the patients in different ways. In their strive for independence, patients progress by learning about and participating in drug treatment, after which they experience that the injections make them independent

A definition of flare in low back pain (LBP): A multiphase process involving perspectives of individuals with LBP and expert consensus

Low back pain (LBP) varies over time. Consumers, clinicians and researchers use various terms to describe fluctuations of LBP symptoms. Although "flare" is commonly used to describe symptom fluctuation, there is no consensus on how it is defined. This study aimed to obtain consensus for a LBP flare definition using a mixed-method approach. Step 1 involved derivation of a preliminary candidate flare definition based on thematic analysis of consumers' views in consultation with an expert consumer writer. In Step 2, a workshop was conducted to incorporate perspectives of LBP experts into the preliminary flare definition, which resulted in two alternative LBP flare definitions. Step 3 refined the definition using a two-round Delphi consensus process with experts in musculoskeletal conditions. The definition favoured by experts was further tested with individuals with LBP in Step 4, using the definition in three scenarios. This multiphase study produced a LBP flare definition that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations, represents views of consumers, involves expert consensus, and is understandable by consumers in clinical and research contexts: "A flare-up is a worsening of your condition that lasts from hours to weeks that is difficult to tolerate and generally impacts your usual activities and/or emotions". Perspective: A multiphase processes produced a low back pain (LBP) flare definition that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations, involves expert consensus and represents consumers' views