Annals of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2013
ANSO study: evaluation in an indoor environment of a mobile assistance robotic grasping arm.
Контролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Coignard P, Departe J P, Remy Neris O, Baillet A, Bar A, Drean D, Verier A, Leroux C, Belletante P, Le Guiet J L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability and functional acceptability of the ‘‘Synthetic Autonomous Majordomo’’ (SAM) robotic aid system (a mobile Neobotix base equipped with a semi-automatic vision interface and a Manus robotic arm).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An open, multicentre, controlled study. We included 29 tetraplegic patients (23 patients with spinal cord injuries, 3 with locked-in syndrome and 4 with other disorders; mean SD age: 37.83 13.3) and 34 control participants (mean SD age: 32.44 11.2). The reliability of the user interface was evaluated in three multi-step scenarios: selection of the room in which the object to be retrieved was located (in the presence or absence of visual control by the user), selection of the object to be retrieved, the grasping of the object itself and the robot’s return to the user with the object. A questionnaire was used to assess the robot’s user acceptability.
RESULTS: The SAM system was stable and reliable: both patients and control participants experienced few failures when completing the various stages of the scenarios. The graphic interface was effective for selecting and grasping the object – even in the absence of visual control. Users and carers were generally satisfied with SAM, although only a quarter of patients said that they would consider using the robot in their activities of daily living.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An open, multicentre, controlled study. We included 29 tetraplegic patients (23 patients with spinal cord injuries, 3 with locked-in syndrome and 4 with other disorders; mean SD age: 37.83 13.3) and 34 control participants (mean SD age: 32.44 11.2). The reliability of the user interface was evaluated in three multi-step scenarios: selection of the room in which the object to be retrieved was located (in the presence or absence of visual control by the user), selection of the object to be retrieved, the grasping of the object itself and the robot’s return to the user with the object. A questionnaire was used to assess the robot’s user acceptability.
RESULTS: The SAM system was stable and reliable: both patients and control participants experienced few failures when completing the various stages of the scenarios. The graphic interface was effective for selecting and grasping the object – even in the absence of visual control. Users and carers were generally satisfied with SAM, although only a quarter of patients said that they would consider using the robot in their activities of daily living.