Cited by 40Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyMuscle activation and electromyography studies

MuscleRehab: Improving Unsupervised Physical Rehabilitation by Monitoring and Visualizing Muscle Engagement

Open access
Zhu, Junyi, Lei, Yuxuan, Shah, Aashini, Schein, Gila, Ghaednia, Hamid, Schwab, Joseph, Harteveld, Casper, Mueller, Stefanie·2022·Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology

Abstract

Unsupervised physical rehabilitation traditionally has used motion tracking to determine correct exercise execution. However, motion tracking is not representative of the assessment of physical therapists, which focus on muscle engagement. In this paper, we investigate if monitoring and visualizing muscle engagement during unsupervised physical rehabilitation improves the execution accuracy of therapeutic exercises by showing users whether they target the right muscle groups. To accomplish this, we use wearable electrical impedance tomography (EIT) to monitor muscle engagement and visualize the current state on a virtual muscle-skeleton avatar. We use additional optical motion tracking to also monitor the user’s movement. We conducted a user study with 10 participants that compares exercise execution while seeing muscle + motion data vs. motion data only, and also presented the recorded data to a group of physical therapists for post-rehabilitation analysis. The results indicate that monitoring and visualizing muscle engagement can improve both the therapeutic exercise accuracy during rehabilitation, and post-rehabilitation evaluation for physical therapists.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3526113.3545705

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The design requirements align with several other research studies that have extracted design requirements for recovery, such as post-operative cancer care, physical injury, cognitive rehabilitation, and recovery in critical care units.

    “Our design requirements align with several other research studies that have extracted design requirements for recovery, such as post-operative cancer care [4], physical injury [73, 82], cognitive rehabilitation [36], and recovery in critical care units[66].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 55 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhu, J., Lei, Y., Shah, A., Schein, G., Ghaednia, H., Schwab, J., Harteveld, C., & Mueller, S.
Affiliations
  • MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • Northeastern University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology
Publisher
ACM
Published
2022-10-28
Pages
1-14
OpenAlex
W4307475983
Cited by
40
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2
FWCI
26.74
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
Keywords
electrical impedance tomography, wearable sensors, optical motion tracking, physiotherapy assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review