Background:When designing a complete process of daily telerehabilitation, it should be borne in mind that patients should be furnished with properly designed methodologies for executing specific motion tasks and the assessment of the relevant parameters. In general, such a process should comprehend three basic elements in both the hospital and the home: (a) instrumented walkways, (b) walking aids or supports, and (c) equipment for the assessment of parameters. The objective, with gait being the focus, of this study was thus to design a simple, portable kit—as an alternative to the complex and expensive instruments currently used—to be easily interfaced or integrated with the instrumented walkways and aids/supports both for self-monitoring while patients are exercising with their own aids and for clinical reporting.Materials and Methods:The proposed system is a portable kit that furnishes useful parameters with feedback to both the patient and the trainer/therapist. Capable of being integrated with the most common mechanical tools used in motion rehabilitation (handrail, scales, walkways, etc.), it constantly monitors and quantitatively assesses progress in rehabilitation care. It is composed of one step counter, photo-emitter detectors, one central unit for collecting and processing the telemetrically transmitted data, and a software interface.Results and Discussion:The system has been successfully validated on 16 subjects at the second level of the Tinetti test in a clinical application for both home and the hospital. The portable kit can be used with different rehabilitation tools and on varying ground rugosity. Advantages include (a) very low cost, when compared with optoelectronic solutions or other portable devices, (b) very high accuracy, also for subjects with imbalance problems, compared with other commercial solutions, and (c) integration (compatibility) with any rehabilitative tool.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
RoganteM, SilvestriS, GrigioniM, ZampoliniM. Electromyographic audio biofeedback for telerehabilitation in hospital. J Telemed Telecare, 2010; 16:204–206.
2.
CabanaF, BoissyP, TousignantM, MoffetH, CorriveauH, DumaisR. Interrater agreement between telerehabilitation and face-to-face clinical outcome measurements for total knee arthroplasty. Telemed J E Health, 2010; 16:293–298.
3.
HillAJ, TheodorosDG, RussellTG, WardEC. The redesign and re-evaluation of an internet-based telerehabilitation system for the assessment of dysarthria in adults. Telemed J E Health, 2009; 15:840–850.
4.
Assistive devices to improve independence. http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/325247-overview
5.
GazzaniF, FaddaA, TorreM, MacellariV. WARD: A pneumatic system for body weight relief in gait rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng, 2000; 8:506–513.
6.
CohiO, ViladotR, ClavellS. Ortesi e aiuti per la deambulazione. Rome: Verduci, 1988.
GiaquintoS, CiotolaE, MarguttiF. Gait in the water: A comparison between young and elderly subjects. Disabil Rehabil, 2007; 29:727–730.
9.
BarelaAM, StolfSF, DuarteM. Biomechanical characteristics of adults walking in shallow water and on land. J Electromyogr Kinesiol, 2006; 16:250–256.
10.
GiansantiD, MaccioniG, MacellariV. The development and test of a device for the reconstruction of 3-D position and orientation by means of a kinematic sensor assembly with rate gyroscopes and accelerometers. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 2005; 52:1271–1277.
11.
MorrisJR. Accelerometry—A technique for the measurement of human body movements. J Biomech, 1973; 6:729–736.
12.
PadgaonkarAJ, KriegerKW, KingAI. Measurement of angular acceleration of a rigid body using linear accelerometers. ASME J Appl Mech, 1975; 42:552–556.
13.
GiansantiD, MaccioniG, BenvenutiF, MacellariV. Inertial measurement units furnish accurate trunk trajectory reconstruction of the sit-to-stand manoeuvre in healthy subjects. Med Biol Eng Comput, 2007; 45:969–976.
14.
Tudor-LockeC, WilliamsJE, ReisJP, PlutoD. Utility of pedometers for assessing physical activity: Convergent validity. Sports Med, 2002; 32:795–808.
15.
SchneiderPL, CrouterSE, BassettDR. Pedometer measures of free-living physical activity: Comparison of 13 models. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2004; 36:331–335.
16.
GiansantiD, TiberiY, MaccioniG. New wearable system for the step counting based on the codivilla-spring for daily activity monitoring in stroke rehabilitation. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, 2008; 4720–4723.
17.
GiansantiD, MacellariV, MaccioniG. Telemonitoring and telerehabilitation of patients with Parkinson's disease: Health technology assessment of a novel wearable step counter. Telemed J E Health, 2008; 14:76–83.
18.
VeltinkPH, BussmannHBJet al.Detection of static and dynamic activities using uniaxial accelerometers. IEEE Trans Rehab Eng, 1996; 4:375–385.
19.
AminianK, RobertP, BuscherEE, RutschmannB, HayozD, DepaironM. Physical activity monitoring based on accelerometry: Validation and comparison with video observation. Med Biol Eng Comput, 1999; 37:304–308.
20.
BussmannJBJ, TulenJHM, van HerelECG, StamHJ. Quantification of physical activities by means of ambulatory accelerometry: A validation study. Psychophysiology, 1998; 35:488–496.
21.
LyonsGM, CulhaneKM, HiltonD, GracePA, LyonsD. A description of an accelerometer-based mobility monitoring technique. Med Eng Phys, 2005; 27:497–504.
22.
BilneyB, MorrisM, WebsterK. Concurrent related validity of the GAITRite® walkway system for quantification of the spatial and temporal parameters of gait. Gait Posture, 2010; 17:68–74.
23.
KandelER, SchwartRJ, JessellTM. Principi di neuroscienze. Milan: Ed. Cea, 2000.
24.
HuttenH, StiegmaierW, RaucheggerG, KissG. A new approach to self-controlled e-learning of selected chapters in medical engineering and other fields at bachelor and master course level. Med Eng Phys, 2005; 27:605–609.
