Skip to main content

Robotic Devices for Overground Gait and Balance Training

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Neurorehabilitation Technology

Abstract

In recent years, we have seen the emergence of robotic technologies that focus on assisting individuals during overground gait and balance therapy following neurological injury and diseases. These devices range in complexity, depending on the type of assistance they provide. For example, at the single joint level, exoskeletons are now being used to supplement limb propulsion as a means of compensating for weakness and poor coordination. At the whole-body level, active body-weight support systems are being used to enhance postural stability as well as compensate for bilateral weakness during gait and balance training.

One of the key aspects of using robots that support overground gait and balance training is that they allow individuals the ability to practice the types of activities they will need to be competent in before returning to their home and into the community. The ability to walk overground, practice standing up and sitting down, and other functional tasks are critical components of achieving functional independence yet are often difficult to safely practice for patients with significant levels of impairment. Not only is the patient at risk for injury but so too is the therapist. The integration of robotic technologies into neurorehabilitation can play a critical role in the safe and effective delivery of gait and balance therapy.

The focus of this chapter is to present some of the newest robotic technologies that support overground gait and balance training, discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of each, and provide a framework for how each may be useful in the clinical setting. Since the area of rehabilitation robotics is quickly expanding with many devices being developed in laboratories around the world, it is not possible for us to detail every technology. Instead, we will highlight a few of the devices and use them for providing a rationale for their usefulness in neurorehabilitation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Neckel N, Nichols D, Pelliccio M, Hidler J. Abnormal synergy patterns and weakness in individuals with chronic stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2006;3:17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hidler J, Carroll M, Federovich E. Strength and coordination in the paretic leg of individuals following acute stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2007;15(4):526–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Olney SJ, Richards C. Hemiparetic gait following stroke. Part I: characteristics. Gait Posture. 1996;4:136–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Arene N, Hidler J. Understanding motor impairment in the paretic lower limb after stroke: a review of the literature. Top Stroke. 2009;16(5):346–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sawicki GS, Ferris DP. Powered ankle exoskeletons reveal metabolic cost of plantar flexor mechanical work during walking with longer steps at constant step frequency. J Exp Biol. 2009;212:21–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Roy A, Krebs HI, Williams DJ, et al. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation: a novel robot for ankle rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Robot. 2009;3:569–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Khanna I, Roy A, Rodgers M, Krebs HI, Macko RM, Forrester LW. Effects of unilateral robotic limb loading on gait characteristics in subjects with chronic stroke. J Neuro Eng Rehabil. 2010;7:23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Forrester LW, Roy A, Krebs HI, Macko RF. Ankle training with a robotic device improves hemiparetic gait after a stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011;25(4):369–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ferris DP, Sawicki GS, Domingo A. Powered lower limb orthoses for gait rehabilitation. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2005;11:34–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ferris DP, Gordon KE, Sawicki GS, Peethambaran A. An improved powered ankle-foot orthosis using proportional myoelectric control. Gait Posture. 2006;23(4):425–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sawicki GS, Ferris DP. A pneumatically powered knee-ankle-foot orthosis (KAFO) with myoelectric activation and inhibition. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2009;6:23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cain SM, Gordon KE, Ferris DP. Locomotor adaptation to a powered ankle-foot orthosis depends on control method. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2007;4:48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Veneman JF, Kruidhof R, Hekman EEG, Ekkelenkamp R, Van Asseldonk EHF, van der Kooij H. Design and evaluation of the LOPES exoskeleton robot for interactive gait rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2007;15(3):379–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Banala SK, Kulpe A, Agrawal SK. A powered leg orthosis for gait rehabilitation of motor-impaired patients. In: IEEE international conference of robotics and automation. Rome; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kazerooni H, Steger R. The Berkeley lower extremity exoskeleton. Trans ASME. 2006;128:14–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dobkin B, Apple D, Barbeau H, Basso M, Behrman A, Deforge D, et al. Scott M and the Spinal Cord Injury Locomotor Trial (SCILT) Group. Weight-supported treadmill vs over-ground training for walking after acute incomplete SCI. Neurology. 2006;66:484–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil. 1987;1:6–18.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Field-Fote EC, Lindley SD, Sherman AL. Locomotor training approaches for individuals with spinal cord injury: a preliminary report on walking related outcomes. J Neuro PT. 2005;29(3):127–37.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hidler J, Nichols D, Pelliccio M, Brady K, Campbell D, Kahn J, et al. Multi-center randomized clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of the Lokomat in sub-acute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23(1):5–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sawicki GS, Ferris DP. A pneumatically powered knee-ankle-foot orthosis (KAFO) with myoelectric activation and inhibition. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2009;23:6–23.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Veneman JF, Kruidhof R, Hekman EEG, et al. Design and evaluation of the LOPES exoskeleton robot for interactive gait rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2007;15(3):379–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Patton J, Lewis E, Crombie G, Peshkin M, Colgate E, Santos J, et al. A novel robotic device to enhance balance and mobility training post-stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2008;15:131–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Peshkin MA, Colgate JE, Wannasuphoprasit W, et al. Cobot architecture. IEEE Trans Robot Automation. 2001;17:377–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph M. Hidler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hidler, J.M., Brown, D.A. (2012). Robotic Devices for Overground Gait and Balance Training. In: Dietz, V., Nef, T., Rymer, W. (eds) Neurorehabilitation Technology. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2277-7_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2277-7_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-2276-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-2277-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics