CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityDysphagia Assessment and Management

Stroke Survivors’ Interaction With Hand Rehabilitation Devices: Observational Study (Preprint)

Open access
Wodu, Chioma Obinuchi, Sweeney, Gillian, Slachetka, Milena, Kerr, Andrew·2023·JMIR Biomedical Engineering
DOI 10.2196/preprints.54159PMC PMC11237792

Preprint — published as 10.2196/54159

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The hand is crucial for carrying out activities of daily living as well as social interaction. Functional use of the upper limb is affected in up to 55% to 75% of stroke survivors 3 to 6 months after stroke. Rehabilitation can help restore function, and several rehabilitation devices have been designed to improve hand function. However, access to these devices is compromised in people with more severe loss of function. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to observe stroke survivors with poor hand function interacting with a range of commonly used hand rehabilitation devices. METHODS: Participants were engaged in an 8-week rehabilitation intervention at a technology-enriched rehabilitation gym. The participants spent 50-60 minutes of the 2-hour session in the upper limb section at least twice a week. Each participant communicated their rehabilitation goals, and an Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) was used to measure and categorize hand function as poor (scores of 0-9), moderate (scores of 10-56), or good (score of 57). Participants were observed during their interactions with 3 hand-based rehabilitation devices that focused on hand rehabilitation: the GripAble, NeuroBall, and Semi-Circular Peg Board. Observations of device interactions were recorded for each session. RESULTS: A total of 29 participants were included in this study, of whom 10 (34%) had poor hand function, 17 (59%) had moderate hand function, and 2 (7%) had good hand function. There were no differences in the age and years after stroke among participants with poor hand function and those with moderate (P=.06 and P=.09, respectively) and good (P=.37 and P=.99, respectively) hand function. Regarding the ability of the 10 participants with poor hand function to interact with the 3 hand-based rehabilitation devices, 2 (20%) participants with an ARAT score greater than 0 were able to interact with the devices, whereas the other 8 (80%) who had an ARAT score of 0 could not. Their inability to interact with these devices was clinically examined, and the reason was determined to be a result of either the presence of (1) muscle tone or stiffness or (2) muscle weakness. CONCLUSIONS: Not all stroke survivors with impairments in their hands can make use of currently available rehabilitation technologies. Those with an ARAT score of 0 cannot actively interact with hand rehabilitation devices, as they cannot carry out the hand movement necessary for such interaction. The design of devices for hand rehabilitation should consider the accessibility needs of those with poor hand function.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/preprints.54159

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wodu, C. O., Sweeney, G., Slachetka, M., & Kerr, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Port Harcourt (NG)
  • University of Strathclyde (GB)
Corresponding author
Wodu, Chioma Obinuchi
ORCID
Venue
JMIR Biomedical Engineering
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2023-10-31
Volume
9
Pages
e54159-e54159
ISSN
2561-3278 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/preprints.54159
PMC
PMC11237792
OpenAlex
W4399265461
Cited by
1
References
50
Citations by year
2025: 1
FWCI
0.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Biomedical Engineering (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (acceptedVersion)
  • Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Dysphagia Assessment and Management
Keywords
stroke survivors, upper limb function, Action Research Arm Test, device accessibility, muscle weakness, grip strength, activities of daily living, upper limb rehabilitation

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