317 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29808109)
21. Robustness and Tracking Performance Evaluation of PID Motion Control of 7 DoF Anthropomorphic Exoskeleton Robot Assisted Upper Limb Rehabilitation.
Ahmed T; Islam MR; Brahmi B; Rahman MH
Sensors (Basel); 2022 May; 22(10):. PubMed ID: 35632155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Patient-Centered Robot-Aided Passive Neurorehabilitation Exercise Based on Safety-Motion Decision-Making Mechanism.
Pan L; Song A; Duan S; Yu Z
Biomed Res Int; 2017; 2017():4185939. PubMed ID: 28194413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. A Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) and robot hybrid system for multi-joint coordinated upper limb rehabilitation after stroke.
Rong W; Li W; Pang M; Hu J; Wei X; Yang B; Wai H; Zheng X; Hu X
J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2017 Apr; 14(1):34. PubMed ID: 28446181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The immediate effects of robot-assistance on energy consumption and cardiorespiratory load during walking compared to walking without robot-assistance: a systematic review.
Lefeber N; Swinnen E; Kerckhofs E
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2017 Oct; 12(7):657-671. PubMed ID: 27762641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Robot-Assisted Reach Training With an Active Assistant Protocol for Long-Term Upper Extremity Impairment Poststroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Cho KH; Song WK
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2019 Feb; 100(2):213-219. PubMed ID: 30686326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The "Beam-Me-In Strategy" - remote haptic therapist-patient interaction with two exoskeletons for stroke therapy.
Baur K; Rohrbach N; Hermsdörfer J; Riener R; Klamroth-Marganska V
J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2019 Jul; 16(1):85. PubMed ID: 31296226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Bilateral robots for upper-limb stroke rehabilitation: State of the art and future prospects.
Sheng B; Zhang Y; Meng W; Deng C; Xie S
Med Eng Phys; 2016 Jul; 38(7):587-606. PubMed ID: 27117423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The H2 robotic exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation after stroke: early findings from a clinical study.
Bortole M; Venkatakrishnan A; Zhu F; Moreno JC; Francisco GE; Pons JL; Contreras-Vidal JL
J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2015 Jun; 12():54. PubMed ID: 26076696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. A mechanism for elbow exoskeleton for customised training.
Manna SK; Dubey VN
IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot; 2017 Jul; 2017():1597-1602. PubMed ID: 28814048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Tongue-controlled robotic rehabilitation: A feasibility study in people with stroke.
Ostadabbas S; Housley SN; Sebkhi N; Richards K; Wu D; Zhang Z; Rodriguez MG; Warthen L; Yarbrough C; Belagaje S; Butler AJ; Ghovanloo M
J Rehabil Res Dev; 2016; 53(6):989-1006. PubMed ID: 28475207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Comparison of exercise training effect with different robotic devices for upper limb rehabilitation: a retrospective study.
Colombo R; Pisano F; Delconte C; Mazzone A; Grioni G; Castagna M; Bazzini G; Imarisio C; Maggioni G; Pistarini C
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med; 2017 Apr; 53(2):240-248. PubMed ID: 27676203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Development of a Pneumatic Exoskeleton Robot for Lower Limb Rehabilitation.
Goergen R; Valdiero AC; Rasia LA; Oberdorfer M; de Souza JP; Goncalves RS
IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot; 2019 Jun; 2019():187-192. PubMed ID: 31374628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Hybrid position and orientation tracking for a passive rehabilitation table-top robot.
Wojewoda KK; Culmer PR; Gallagher JF; Jackson AE; Levesley MC
IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot; 2017 Jul; 2017():702-707. PubMed ID: 28813902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. An optimized design of a parallel robot for gait training.
Maddalena M; Saadat M; Rastegarpanah A; Loureiro RCV
IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot; 2017 Jul; 2017():418-423. PubMed ID: 28813855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Development of a powered variable-stiffness exoskeleton device for elbow rehabilitation.
Liu Y; Guo S; Hirata H; Ishihara H; Tamiya T
Biomed Microdevices; 2018 Aug; 20(3):64. PubMed ID: 30074095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. EMU: A transparent 3D robotic manipulandum for upper-limb rehabilitation.
Fong J; Crocher V; Tan Y; Oetomo D; Mareels I
IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot; 2017 Jul; 2017():771-776. PubMed ID: 28813913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Technology-assisted stroke rehabilitation in Mexico: a pilot randomized trial comparing traditional therapy to circuit training in a Robot/technology-assisted therapy gym.
Bustamante Valles K; Montes S; Madrigal Mde J; Burciaga A; Martínez ME; Johnson MJ
J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2016 Sep; 13(1):83. PubMed ID: 27634471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Human arm weight compensation in rehabilitation robotics: efficacy of three distinct methods.
Just F; Özen Ö; Tortora S; Klamroth-Marganska V; Riener R; Rauter G
J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2020 Feb; 17(1):13. PubMed ID: 32024528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Stroke Rehabilitation: Therapy Robots and Assistive Devices.
Klamroth-Marganska V
Adv Exp Med Biol; 2018; 1065():579-587. PubMed ID: 30051408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Influence of complementing a robotic upper limb rehabilitation system with video games on the engagement of the participants: a study focusing on muscle activities.
Li C; Rusák Z; Horváth I; Ji L
Int J Rehabil Res; 2014 Dec; 37(4):334-42. PubMed ID: 25221845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
