Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 51-4inkOmslag | Page 69

15
10
UE performance with a soft-robotic glove in elderly patients
5
0
-5
Grasping
Reach-with-object
Releasing
Reach-to-base
-10
-15
-20
Median
P01
P02
P03
P04
P05
P06
P07
P08
Fig. 5. Difference scores (with minus without the glove) of the heavy
object are presented per participant and group median for the movement
time for the grasping, reach-with-object, releasing and reach-to-base
phases relative to the total movement time.
participants were diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis/
osteoarthritis, one participant had multiple sclerosis
and one had carpal tunnel syndrome. Baseline hand-
grip strength data indicated “weak”’ handgrip strength
for all participants, based on cut-off points related to
increased risk of mobility limitations (30). Four par-
ticipants were able to lift 2,500 g.
Movement execution parameters averaged over all
subjects are shown in Table II. A typical example of
task execution, in terms of movement time, movement
phases, speed and movement smoothness, is shown
in Fig. 4.
No negative influence on total movement duration
was found (Table II). After division of the movement
into phases, an increase in the relative time needed to
grasp the object and a decrease in time needed during
the reach-with-object phase with the glove compared
with without the glove (p = 0.05 and p = 0.04, respec-
tively) was found only in the heavy condition (Fig. 5).
Peak velocity was smaller with support from the
glove in the light condition (p = 0.01), but was not seen
with the heavy object (Fig. 6).
Maximum hand opening was larger in the reach-to-
grasp phase of the light object while receiving support
from the glove (p = 0.05) (Fig. 6).
No differences in either movement smoothness or
trunk displacement were found when comparing with
and without the glove in both the light and heavy
condition (Table II).
No significant differences in joint excursion of the
elbow and wrist were found with the glove compared
with without the glove, except for a larger elbow
extension excursion and a larger maximum elbow
extension angle in the light condition (p = 0.04 and
p = 0.01, respectively).
DISCUSSION
The influence of grip support from the soft-robotic
ironHand glove on movement execution of the upper
extremity during a simulated reach-and-grasp task with
a light (100 g) and heavy cylindrical object (≥ 1,000 g)
has been investigated in the present study. As expected,
no positive influence of the ironHand glove on total
movement duration was found in either of the weight
conditions. During the light condition, movements
were executed within the lower range of a person’s
capacity. In the heavy condition, movements were
performed more towards, but still within, the upper
limits of functional performance. With the glove, trans-
portation of light objects occurred with a lower peak
velocity and higher elbow extension, and grasping of
the object involved an increased hand opening, while
with the heavy objects relative grasp duration was
1.4
1.3
P02 1.2
P03
P04
P05
0.19
0.17
P01
Movement execution
1.1
1
0.9
P06 0.8
P07 0.7
P08 0.6
303
0.15
0.13
0.11
Without glove
With glove
Without glove
With glove
Fig. 6. Individual scores per participant (lines) and group boxplot with and without glove of peak velocity (left) and maximum hand opening distance
(right), using the light object. Note that the y-axes do not start at 0.
J Rehabil Med 51, 2019