Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Orthoses prototypes for tremor suppression. Information not provided is marked with “?”

From: Need for mechanically and ergonomically enhanced tremor-suppression orthoses for the upper limb: a systematic review

# Orthosis name/Group Supp. type Suppression mechanism Suppression characteristic Efficacy [%] (method) Voluntary movement disturbance Evaluation method(tremor disease or simulation) DOF coefficient Total weight /one attenuator [kg]
1 Voluntary Driven Orthosis Hernstadt [38,39,40] active Direct drive motor [38,39,40] 3 Nm [38,39,40] 99.8 (PSD) [39, 40] 0.15% (magnitude change) [39] test bench (1 ET/PD dataset) [38,39,40] 1/1 (EFE) [38,39,40] 0.875 / 0.334 [39]
2 EMG Exoskeleton Fujie [41,42,43,44] active Direct drive motor [41,42,43,44] ? ? 10.5% (not recognised movement) [42] ? 1/1 (EFE) [41,42,43,44] 0.330 /? [42,43,44]
3 EMG Exoskeleton v2Fujie [45, 46] active Direct drive motor [45, 46] 1.3 Nm [45] 50–80 (AA) [45, 46] no voluntary movement detection yet [45, 46] 1 tremor subject (ET) [45, 46] 1/4 (EFE) [45, 46] 0.410 /? [45]
4 WOTAS Pons/Rocon [28, 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55] active Direct drive motor [28, 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55] 8 Nm [53, 54] 40 (PSD) [28, 47, 49, 52, 54, 56] 80 mNm (resistance torque) [53, 54] 10 tremor subjects (ET, PD, MS, post-traumatic, and mixed tremor) [47, 51, 53, 54] 3/4 (No WD) [28, 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56] 0.850 / 0.165 [51, 55, 54, 56]
5 ADL Exoskeleton Imperial College [57] active Direct drive motor [57] 2.6 Nm [57] 77 (AA) [57] ? 6 healthy subjects (simulating tremor) [57] 2/3 (WFE, FPS, no WD) [57] 0.350 / 0.072 [57]
6 MMS Tendon Glove Western University [58] active Tendon [58] 16.2 N [58] ? 12.4% (not recognised movement) [58] test bench (7 PD datasets) [58] 1/1 (WFE) [58] ? / 0.229 [58]
7 PMLM Zamanian/Richer [59] active Linear motor [59] 400 N/(m/s) & 67 N [59] 97.6 (PSD) [59] 0.36 N (resistance force) [59] test bench (PD datasets) [59] 4/4 (all) [59] ? / 0.315 [59]
8 Pneumatic Actuator Taheri/Richer [60,61,62,63,64] active Pneumatic piston-coil [60,61,62,63,64] 15 N [64] 98.8 (PSD) [60, 62, 64] 4.8% (magnitude change) [64] test bench (10 PD&ET datasets) [62, 64] 4/4 (all) [60,61,62,63,64] ? / 0.378 [60,61,62,63,64]
9 MR Damper Case/Richer [65,66,67,68,69,70] semi-active Magnetorheological piston-coil [65,66,67,68,69,70] 8.9–187 N/(m/s) [65,66,67,68,69,70] 96.33 (PSD) [67] 4.47 N (resistance force) [67] test bench (10 PD&ET datasets) [67] 4/4 (all) [66,67,68,69,70] ? / 0.204 [65,66,67,68,69,70]
10 EB Orthosis Hernstadt [71] semi-active Electromagnetic friction brake [71] 2.2 Nm [71] 88 (PSD) [70] ? (probably none) 3 healthy subjects (simulating tremor) [71] 1/1 (EFE) [71] 0.942 / 0.150 [71]
11 Pneumatic Hand Cuff PSG College of Tech. [72] semi-active Pneumatic cuff [72] ? 30 (AA) [72] Yes [72] 1 tremor subject (ET) [72] 2/2 (WFE, WD) [72] ? /?
12 DVB Orthosis Loureiro/Pons [73] semi-active Viscous shear resistance [73] 6.5 -25,000 N/(m/s) [73] 98 (PSD) [72] 14.13% (magnitude change) [73] 1 tremor subject (ET) [73] 2/2 (WFE, WD) [73] ? / 0.200 [73]
13 The Viscous Beam Kotovsky/Rosen [74] passive Viscous shear resistance [74] 0.002 Nm/(deg/s) [74] ? Yes [74] 5 tremor subjects [74] 1/2 (WFE, no WD) [74] 0.265 /? [74]
14 Air Dashpot Orthosis Takanokura et al. [74] passive Pneumatic piston-coil [74] 1800 N/(m/s) [74] 80 (RMS.) [74] Yes [74] 1 healthy subject (electrical stimulation) [74] 3/4 (no FPS) [74] ? / 0.037 [74]
15 Vib-Bracelet Israel Institute of Tech. [75] passive Tuned mass (spring + mass) [75] ? 86 (AD) [75] ? test bench [75] 1/1 (FPS) [75] 0.280 /? [75]
16 Damping Orthosis Israel Institute of Tech. [76] passive Rotary damper [76] 0.002 Nm/(deg/s) [76] ? Yes [76] 1 tremor subject (PD) [76] 1/2 (WFE, no WD) [76] 0.200 /? [76]