Comparison Between Robotic Finger Therapy Exercise and Conventional Exercise on the Range of Motion of the Metacarpophalangeal Joints: Study of Post-stroke Patients at Diponegoro National Hospital
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36408/mhjcm.v11i3.1155Keywords:
conventional exercise, robotic finger therapy, metacarpophalangeal joints range of motion.Abstract
BACKGROUND : Metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints range of motion (RoM) exercise can be done using either conventional exercise or robotic finger therapy. This study aimed to compare MCP joints RoM improvement between conventional exercise and robotic finger therapy exercise in post-stroke patients.
METHOD : This study was a randomized controlled trial pre and post test controlled group design. The data were taken from individuals aged 45-65 years with a history of stroke undergoing medical rehabilitation at the Diponegoro National Hospital before and after intervention (robotic finger therapy exercise vs conventional exercise) for 6 weeks. MCP joints RoM was measured using goniometer before and after the intervention. Datas were analysed using SPSS ver 20.0. Normality of data distribution would be assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Differences in the RoM of MCP joints before and after treatment in each group were tested using paired t-test. Group differences were tested using unpaired t-test.
RESULT : There was significant RoM improvement in each MCP joint in each group before and after the treatment (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in RoM improvement between groups (p>0.05).
CONCLUSION : Both robotic and conventional therapy significantly improve MCP joints RoM in post-stroke patients. There was no significant difference in MCP joints RoM improvements between robotic finger therapy and conventional exercise.
Downloads
References
1. Laporan Nasional Riskesdas 2018. Jakarta: Lembaga Penerbit Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kesehatan;
2. Primadi O, Ma'ruf A, Indrayani YA, Wardah, Susanti MI, Pangribowo S, et al. Profil Kesehatan Indonesia 2020. Jakarta: Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia;
3. Cuccurullo SJ. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Board Review, Fourth Edition: Springer Publishing Company;
4. Kisner C, Colby LA, Borstad J. Therapeutic Exercise: Foundations and Techniques: F.A. Davis Company; 2017.
5. Ghasemi E, Khademi-Kalantari K, Khalkhali-Zavieh M, Rezasoltani A, Ghasemi M, Baghban AA, et al. The effect of functional stretching exercises on functional outcomes in spastic stroke patients: A randomized controlled clinical J B o d y w M o v T h e r 2 0 1 8 ; 2 2 ( 4 ) : 1 0 0 4 – 1 2 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2017.09.021.
6. Aman JE, Elangovan N, Yeh IL, Konczak The effectiveness of proprioceptive training for improving motor function: a systematic review. Front Hum Neurosci 2014;8:1075. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01075.
7. Medicine ACoS, Liguori G, Feito Y, Fountaine CJ, Roy B. ACSM's Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription: Wolters Kluwer; p.178–185.
8. Keeling AB, Piitz M, Semrau JA, Hill MD, Scott SH, Dukelow Robot enhanced stroke therapy optimizes rehabilitation (RESTORE): a pilot study. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2021;18(1):10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00804-8.
9. Chang WH, Kim Robot-assisted Therapy in Stroke R e h a b i l i t a t i o n . J S t r o k e 2013;15(3):174–81.https://doi.org/10.5853/jos.2013.15.3.174.
10. Stecco A, Stecco C, Raghavan P. Peripheral Mechanisms Contributing to Spasticity and Implications for Treatment. Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports 2014;2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40141-014-0052-3.
11. Trompetto C, Marinelli L, Mori L, Canneva S, Colombano F, Traverso E, et al. The effect of age on post-activation depression of the upper limb H- Eur J Appl Physiol 2014;114(2):359–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-013-2778-5.
12. Valero-Cuevas FJ, Klamroth-Marganska V, Winstein CJ, Riener Robot-assisted and conventional therapies produce distinct rehabilitative trends in stroke survivors. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2016;13(1):92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-016-0199-5.
13. Carrillo C, Tilley D, Horn K, Gonzalez M, Coffman C, Hilton C, et al. Effectiveness of Robotics in Stroke Rehabilitation to Accelerate Upper Extremity Function: Systematic Review. O c c u p T h e r I n t 2 0 2 3 ; 2 0 2 3 : 7 9 9 1 7 6 5 . https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/7991765.
14. Singh N, Saini M, Kumar N, Srivastava MVP, Mehndiratta A. Evidence of neuroplasticity with robotic hand exoskeleton for post-stroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. J N e u r o e n g R e h a b i l 2 0 2 1 ; 1 8 ( 1 ) : 7 6 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-021-00867-7.
15. Lee BO, Saragih ID, Batubara Robotic arm use for upper limb rehabilitation after stroke: A systematic review and meta- analysis. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2023;39(5):435–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/kjm2.12679.
16. Nik Ramli NN, Asokan A, Mayakrishnan D, Annamalai Exploring Stroke Rehabilitation in Malaysia: Are Robots Better than Humans for Stroke Recuperation? Malays J Med Sci 2021;28(4):14–23. https://doi.org/10.21315/mjms2021.28.4.3.
17. Germanotta M, Cortellini L, Insalaco S, Aprile I. Effects of Upper Limb Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation Compared with Conventional Therapy in Patients with Stroke: Preliminary Results on a Daily Task Assessed Using Motion Analysis. Sensors 2023;23(6):3089.
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Daniel Andry Kurniawan, dr. Rahmi Isma A.P., Sp. K.F.R., Ped. (K), M.Si.Med, dr. Dewi Kusuma Hartono, Sp. K.F.R., dr. Hari Peni Julianti, M.Kes, Sp. K.F.R., Ger. (K), FISPH, FISCM, AIFO-K, dr. Erna Setiawati, Sp. K.F.R., K.R. (K), M.Si.Med, dr. Tanti Ajoe Kesoema, Sp. K.F.R., M.S. (K), M.Si.Med, FIPM (USG), dr. Sri Wahyudati, Sp. K.F.R., K.R. (K), AIFO-K (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyrights Notice
Copyrights:
Researchers publishing manuscrips at Medica Hospitalis: Journal of Clinical Medicine agree with regulations as follow:
Copyrights of each article belong to researchers, and it is likewise the patent rights
Researchers admit that Medica Hospitalia: Journal of Clinical Medicine has the right of first publication
Researchers may submit manuscripts separately, manage non exclusive distribution of published manuscripts into other versions (such as: being sent to researchers’ institutional repository, publication in the books, etc), admitting that manuscripts have been firstly published at Medica Hospitalia: Journal of Clinical Medicine
License:
Medica Hospitalia: Journal of Clinical Medicine is disseminated based on provisions of Creative Common Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 Internasional It allows individuals to duplicate and disseminate manuscripts in any formats, to alter, compose and make derivatives of manuscripts for any purpose. You are not allowed to use manuscripts for commercial purposes. You should properly acknowledge, reference links, and state that alterations have been made. You can do so in proper ways, but it does not hint that the licensors support you or your usage.
