Home  |  Login  |  Inquiries | TOC Alerts  |  Sitemap |  

Advanced Search
J Exerc Rehabil > Volume 21(1);2025 > Article
Jee: Potential issues of future robot-assisted rehabilitation exercises
Robot-assisted rehabilitation exercises are not only possible but are increasingly being implemented in clinical practice to support recovery in patients with various physical impairments. This technology leverages robotics and intelligent systems to provide targeted, consistent, and often highly customizable rehabilitation programs. These systems employ advanced devices and technologies to support patient recovery and improve motor function. Robotic devices can be wearable exoskeletons, robotic hands and arms, or stationary systems designed to assist specific movements. Exoskeletons are often used for upper and lower limb rehabilitation, providing mechanical support and guiding movements to help patients relearn motor skills (Lo and Xie, 2012). Treadmill-based robots assist with gait training for individuals recovering from strokes or spinal cord injuries, enabling controlled and repetitive walking practice (Reinkensmeyer et al., 2004). Additionally, hands and arms robots facilitate the recovery of fine motor skills, particularly in post-stroke patients or individuals with neurological conditions (Torrisi et al., 2021).
Specifically, integrated sensors built-in robot monitor patient movements and provide real-time feedback, allowing the robot to adjust parameters such as resistance, speed, and range of motion (RoM) to align with the patient’s progress (Marchal-Crespo and Reinkensmeyer, 2009). Some systems incorporate gamification and virtual reality to make exercises more engaging, enhance patient motivation, and simulate real-world scenarios. Furthermore, robotic devices collect performance data, including metrics like RoM, strength, and endurance, which clinicians can use to track progress and optimize treatment plans (Reinkensmeyer et al., 2004). These features collectively enable robotic-assisted rehabilitation systems to provide precise, adaptive, and patient-centered therapeutic interventions.
Robotic-assisted rehabilitation systems offer numerous advantages that enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of therapeutic interventions. One key benefit is consistency, as robots deliver uniform assistance and resistance throughout exercises, ensuring accuracy and repeatability. This consistency reduces variability that may occur with manual therapy, promoting optimal outcomes (Marchal-Crespo and Reinkensmeyer, 2009). Another advantage is customization. These systems allow exercises to be tailored to meet the specific needs and recovery goals of each patient, enabling targeted therapy that adapts to individual progress (Chang and Kim, 2013). Furthermore, robotic systems provide intensity and safety, as they can safely push patients beyond their perceived physical limits without risking injury, fostering improved muscular strength and endurance (Lo and Xie, 2012). Robots also excel in objective progress tracking by collecting quantitative data, such as RoM and strength metrics, which clinicians can use to measure recovery milestones with precision. Finally, patient engagement is significantly enhanced through interactive features, including gamification and virtual reality, making therapy sessions more enjoyable and motivating (Yoo et al., 2024). These advantages collectively make robotic-assisted rehabilitation a valuable tool in modern therapeutic practices.
Robotic-assisted rehabilitation systems are applied across a wide range of medical and physical fields, addressing diverse patient needs. In neurological rehabilitation, these systems are particularly beneficial for individuals recovering from strokes, spinal cord injuries, or managing conditions such as cerebral palsy. By promoting neuroplasticity and enabling repetitive, precise movements, robotic systems support the restoration of motor functions and improve patients’ quality of life (Chang and Kim, 2013). In orthopedic rehabilitation, robotic systems are used for post-surgery recovery, including joint replacements and injuries such as shoulder dislocations. These devices help restore strength, RoM, and functionality through tailored and controlled exercises (Lo and Xie, 2012). For geriatric rehabilitation, robots assist older adults in regaining mobility, enhancing balance, and reducing the risk of falls. These systems also address age-related declines in motor function, enabling seniors to maintain independence (Torrisi et al., 2021). In the field of sports medicine, robotic rehabilitation plays a crucial role in accelerating recovery and optimizing outcomes for athletes. By providing precise and adjustable resistance, these systems help athletes rebuild strength and improve performance after injuries, ensuring a safe return to their sport (Reinkensmeyer et al., 2004). These applications demonstrate the versatility and effectiveness of robotic systems in enhancing rehabilitation outcomes across various patient populations.
In conclusion, robot-assisted rehabilitation systems offer substantial potential in revolutionizing therapeutic practices across a variety of medical fields. By leveraging advanced robotics and intelligent technologies, these systems provide targeted, consistent, and customizable rehabilitation interventions that improve motor function, enhance recovery, and promote neuroplasticity. Key benefits, including precision, safety, and the ability to track progress objectively, enhance the overall rehabilitation experience, leading to better patient outcomes and engagement. However, despite these promising advantages, challenges such as high costs, the need for specialized training, and limitations in customization remain. Yet, with continued advancements in robotics, artificial intelligence, and data science, the effectiveness, affordability, and usability of robotic-assisted rehabilitation systems are expected to improve, further cementing their role in modern healthcare.

Notes

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

REFERENCES

Chang WH, Kim YH. Robot-assisted Therapy in Stroke Rehabilitation. J Stroke 2013;15:174–181.
crossref pmid pmc

Lo HS, Xie SQ. Exoskeleton robots for upper-limb rehabilitation: state of the art and future prospects. Med Eng Phys 2012;34:261–268.
crossref pmid

Marchal-Crespo L, Reinkensmeyer DJ. Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2009;6:20
crossref pdf

Reinkensmeyer DJ, Emken JL, Cramer SC. Robotics, motor learning, and neurologic recovery. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2004;6:497–525.
crossref pmid

Torrisi M, Maggio MG, De Cola MC, Zichittella C, Carmela C, Porcari B, la Rosa G, De Luca R, Naro A, Calabrò RS. Beyond motor recovery after stroke: The role of hand robotic rehabilitation plus virtual reality in improving cognitive function. J Clin Neurosci 2021;92:11–16.
crossref pmid

Yoo DH, Jo SG, Yoo J, Jee YS. Enhancing neuromuscular function and psychological recovery in knee injury patients through an interactive line game: a sex-specific analysis of randomised controlled trials. Isokinet Exerc Sci 2024. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593020241296403.
crossref

TOOLS
PDF Links  PDF Links
PubReader  PubReader
ePub Link  ePub Link
XML Download  XML Download
Full text via DOI  Full text via DOI
Download Citation  Download Citation
  Print
Share:      
METRICS
0
Crossref
0
Scopus
385
View
62
Download
Suggestions for clinical study of exercise rehabilitation  2018 October;14(5)
Evolution of exercise rehabilitation  2014 December;10(6)
Related articles
Editorial Office
E-mail: journal@kser.co.kr
Copyright © Korean Society of Exercise Rehabilitation.            Developed in M2PI