Comparisons of Interaction Techniques between Stroke Survivors and Healthy Subjects in a Haptic Collaborative Task by Michael Bowler

1. Collaborative Haptic Interactions
Michael Bowler – University of Hertfordshire

2. ‘Phantom’ Haptic Device
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
2

3. Goals
 Modes of collaboration
 Understanding movement
 Establish learning of the task
 Influence design of future systems
 Test networked haptics and model of collaboration for
future work
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
3

4. Sorting Blocks Box
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
4

5. Virtual Environment
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
5

6. Collaboration Protocol
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
6

7. Experiment 1 - Haptic
Collaboration
 300+ participant over 3 days
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
7

8. Experiment 2 – Home-Based
Rehabilitation
 4 stroke survivors
 12-weeks of haptic assessment and exercise tasks
 Participants have suffered some level of upper-limb impairment
as a result of their stroke.
 Participants >6 months post stroke, with no further strokes
within the last 6 months.
 Participants were not receiving any other therapy for hand and
wrist function.
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
8

9. Why home-based?
 Can be more effective at home
 Can reduce costs
 In the comfort of own home
 Likely to exercise more frequently and with greater
variability
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
9

10. Shape Preferences
 Four shapes: Box, Star-shaped block, Cylinder, and a
Sphere.
 Two categories: curved sided, and flat sided.
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
10

11. Shape Preference
Force
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
11

12. Shape Preference
Accuracy
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
12

13. Shape Preference
Work
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
13

14. Collaborative Forces
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
14

15. Order Frequency – Left to
Right
14
12
10
8 1
2
6
3
4 4
2
Healthy Group
90
0
80
Star Cylinder Sphere Box
70
60
Stroke Group 1
50
2
40
3
30
4
20
10
0
Star Cylinder Sphere Box
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
15

16. Shape Preferences
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
16

17. Limitations
 There was no continued/follow up which may may have
shown further increases in task performance and a
demonstration of learned skill for the task for the
healthy group.
 Interaction pairs in the stroke group consisted of the
participant and the investigator providing an interaction
bias.
Collaborative Haptic Interactions - Michael Bowler 12/07/2012
17

18. Conclusions
 Different shapes afford different movements/interaction
paradigms
 Curved surfaced shapes can be used for fine motor
skill practice
 Flat sided shapes can be used for strength/stamina
building exercises

19. Acknowledgments
 This work has been conducted as part of a PhD which
has been funded by the EU FP7 framework projects:
 LIREC EC (Living with Robots and Interactive
Companions) http://lirec.eu
 SCRIPT (Supervised Care and Rehabilitation Involving
Personal Tele-Robotics) http://scriptproject.eu