How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRR’s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program

The Armeo Spring as training tool to improve upper limb functionality in multiple sclerosis: a pilot study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Few research in multiple sclerosis (MS) has focused on physical rehabilitation of upper limb dysfunction, though the latter strongly influences independent performance of activities of daily living. Upper limb rehabilitation technology could hold promise for complementing traditional MS therapy. Consequently, this pilot study aimed to examine the feasibility of an 8-week mechanical-assisted training program for improving upper limb muscle strength and functional capacity in MS patients with evident paresis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A case series was applied, with provision of a training program (3×/week, 30 minutes/session), supplementary on the customary maintaining care, by employing a gravity-supporting exoskeleton apparatus (Armeo Spring). Ten high-level disability MS patients (Expanded Disability Status Scale 7.0-8.5) actively performed task-oriented movements in a virtual real-life-like learning environment with the affected upper limb. Tests were administered before and after training, and at 2-month follow-up. Muscle strength was determined through the Motricity Index and Jamar hand-held dynamometer. Functional capacity was assessed using the TEMPA, Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and 9-Hole Peg Test (9HPT).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Muscle strength did not change significantly. Significant gains were particularly found in functional capacity tests. After training completion, TEMPA scores improved (<it>p </it>= 0.02), while a trend towards significance was found for the 9HPT (<it>p </it>= 0.05). At follow-up, the TEMPA as well as ARAT showed greater improvement relative to baseline than after the 8-week intervention period (<it>p </it>= 0.01, <it>p </it>= 0.02 respectively).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results of present pilot study suggest that upper limb functionality of high-level disability MS patients can be positively influenced by means of a technology-enhanced physical rehabilitation program.</p

Neuroplasticity-based technologies and interventions for restoring motor functions in multiple sclerosis

Motor impairments are very common in multiple sclerosis (MS), leading to a reduced Quality of Life and active participation. In the past decades, new insights into the functional reorganization processes that occur after a brain injury have been introduced. Specifically, the motor practice seems to be determinant to induce neuroplastic changes and motor recovery. More recently, these findings have been extended to multiple sclerosis, in particular, it has been hypothesized that disease progression, functional reorganization and disability are mutually related. For this reason, neuroplasticity-based technologies and interventions have been rapidly introduced in MS rehabilitation. Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT), robotics and virtual reality training are new rehabilitative interventions that deliver an intensive e task-specific practice, which are two critical factors associated with functional improvements and cortical reorganization. Another promising strategy for enhancing neuroplastic changes is non-invasive brain stimulation that can be used with a priming effect on motor training. The aims of this chapter are to review the evidence of neuroplastic changes in multiple sclerosis and to present technologies and interventions that have been tested in clinical trials