Effects of a robot intervention on visuospatial hemineglect in postacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Objective:

To evaluate the effects of an intervention using the robot device PARO on visuospatial hemineglect and activities of daily living, and its acceptance during stroke rehabilitation. PARO is an interactive robotic toy with the appearance of a baby seal, which can move, produce sounds, and react to speech and touch.

Design:

A randomized controlled trial.

Setting:

Hospital for neurorehabilitation.

Subjects:

Patients above 60 years old who have suffered their first stroke within the previous three months with left hemineglect (n = 39).

Interventions:

The PARO group (n = 21) was exposed to PARO over a period of two weeks, three times per week. The participants of the control group (n = 18) were read to aloud.

Outcome measure:

Visuospatial hemineglect was measured by a cancellation test and a Line Bisection Test, and independence in the activities of daily living was assessed by Scores of Independence Index for Neurological and Geriatric Rehabilitation (SINGER) test. The acceptance of PARO was also evaluated. Data were collected blinded at three times: baseline (T0), after two weeks of interventions (T1), and after additional two weeks as follow-up (T2).

Results:

Improvement of hemineglect at T1 and T2 was significantly higher in the PARO group (T1: mean (SD) = 6.23 (3.81); T2: mean (SD) = 7.85 (3.68)) compared to the control group (T1: mean (SD) = 2.66 (4.19); T2: mean (SD) = 3.33 (4.16)) (T1: P < 0.05; T2: P < 0.05).

Conclusion:

The study showed that the use of the PARO is well accepted and can help to improve neglect symptoms in patients with subacute stroke.

Keywords

Hemineglect activities of daily living PARO subacute stroke

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Karnath

H-O

. In: Karnath

H-O

Thier

(eds). Neuropsychologie: Mit 24 Tabellen. 2nd ed. Heidelberg: Springer, pp.212–224.

Vanbellingen

Ottiger

Maaijwee

et al. Spatial neglect predicts upper limb use in the activities of daily living. Cerebrovasc Dis 2017; 44: 122–127.

Nijboer

van de Port

Schepers

et al. Predicting functional outcome after stroke: the influence of neglect on basic activities in daily living. Front Hum Neurosci 2013; 7: 182.

Kerkhoff

Evidenzbasierte Verfahren in der neurovisuellen Rehabilitation. Neurorehabilitation 2010; 16(2): 82–90.

Kerkhoff

Schmidt

Neglect und assoziierte Störungen (Fortschritte der Neuropsychologie Band 1). 2., überarbeitete Auflage. Göttingen: Hogrefe, 2018.

Fink

G-R

Heide

. Rehabilitation des visuellen-räumlichen Neglect. In: Nelles

(ed.) Neurologische Rehabilitation: 115 Tabellen Stuttgart: Thieme, pp.122–129.

Wulf

Scheidtmann

Neurologische Syndrome und Störungen: Neglect. In: Hüter-Becker

Brüggemann

(eds) Physiotherapie in der Neurologie: 36 Tabellen. 2nd ed. Stuttgart and New York: Thieme, 2007, pp.151–164.

Kachouie

Sedighadeli

Khosla

et al. Socially assistive robots in elderly care: a mixed-method systematic literature review. Int J Hum-Comput Int 2014; 30(5): 369–393.

Wagner

Robotopia Nipponica: Recherchen zur Akzeptanz von Robotern in Japan. Marburg: Tectum-Verlag, 2013.

10.

Shibata

Wada

Robot therapy: a new approach for mental healthcare of the elderly—a mini-review. Gerontology 2011; 57(4): 378–386.

11.

Wada

Shibata

Musha

et al. Robot therapy for elders affected by dementia. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 2008; 27(4): 53–60.

12.

Libin

EV.

Person–robot interactions from the robopsychologists’ point of view: the robotic psychology and robotherapy approach. P IEEE 2004; 92(11): 1789–1803.

13.

Shibata

Therapeutic seal robot as biofeedback medical device: qualitative and quantitative evaluations of robot therapy in dementia care. P IEEE 2012; 100(8): 2527–2538.

14.

Roger

Guse

Mordoch

et al. Social commitment robots and dementia. Can J Aging 2012; 31(1): 87–94.

15.

Joranson

Pedersen

Rokstad

AMM

et al. Group activity with Paro in nursing homes: systematic investigation of behaviors in participants. Int Psychogeriatr 2016; 28(8): 1345–1354.

16.

Petersen

Houston

Qin

et al. The utilization of robotic pets in dementia care. J Alzheimers Dis 2017; 55(2): 569–574.

17.

Sung

H-C

Chang

S-M

Chin

M-Y

et al. Robot-assisted therapy for improving social interactions and activity participation among institutionalized older adults: a pilot study. Asia Pac Psychiatry 2015; 7(1): 1–6.

18.

Moyle

Cooke

Beattie

et al. Exploring the effect of companion robots on emotional expression in older adults with dementia: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Gerontol Nurs 2013; 39(5): 46–53.

19.

Valenti Soler

Aguera-Ortiz

Olazaran Rodriguez

et al. Social robots in advanced dementia. Front Aging Neurosci 2015; 7: 133.

20.

Haid

Hoch-Städele

Pech

et al. Cats-Test: Normen für ein Screeningverfahren zur Neglectdiagnostik. Z Neuropsychol 2010; 3(31): 206.

21.

Götze

Zenz

Neuropsychologisches Befundsystem für die Ergotherapie. 3rd ed. Berlin: Springer, 2010.

22.

Funke

U-N

Schüwer

Themann

et al. Selbständigkeits-Index für die Neurologische und Geriatrische Rehabilitation: SINGER-Manual zur Stufenzuordnung. Regensburg: S. Roderer Verlag, 2009.

23.

Arbeitsgruppe Geriatrisches Assessment (Hrsg.). Geriatrisches Basisassessment: Handlungsanleitungen für die Praxis (Schriftenreihe Geriatrie-Praxis). 2., aktualisierte Auflage. München: MMV-Medizin-Verlag, 1997.

24.

Schädler

Kool

Lüthi

et al. Assessments in der Neurorehabilitation (Gesundheitsberufe Physiotherapie). 1st ed. Bern: Huber, 2006.

25.

Mayring

Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken. 11., aktualisierte und überarb Auflage. Weinheim: Beltz, 2010.

26.

Ferber

Karnath

H-O.

How to assess spatial neglect—line bisection or cancellation tasks?

J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2001; 23(5): 599–607.

27.

Bemelmans

Gelderblom

G-J

Jonker

et al. Socially assistive robots in elderly care: a systematic review into effects and effectiveness. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2012; 13(2): 114–120.e1.

28.

Moyle

Bramble

Jones

et al. Care staff perceptions of a social robot called Paro and a look-alike Plush Toy: a descriptive qualitative approach. Aging Ment Health 2016; 22(3): 330–335.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.04 MB