RESEARCH ARTICLE

Robotics as a Form of Non Surgical Complementary Osteoarthritis Treatment

Ray Marks

Department of Health and Behavior Studies, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York

Corresponding Author: Ray Marks. Department of Health and Behavior Studies, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA. E-mail: [email protected] 

Received: July 11, 2023                                        Published: July 21, 2023 

Citation: Marks R. Robotics as a Form of Non Surgical Complementary Osteoarthritis Treatment. Int J Complement Intern Med. 2023;5(1):189–198. DOI: 10. 58349/IJCIM. 1. 5. 2023. 00129 

Copyright: ©2023 Marks. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.

Abstract 

Osteoarthritis, a widespread joint disease that engenders considerable disability among a large proportion of older adults in all parts of the world is a major costly social and fiscal public health concern. While largely incurable, it is shown that a variety of carefully designed conservative non invasive interventions may however, influence the disease process quite favourably. However, whether certain advances in technology and less emphasis on non pharmacologic and non surgical health programs and others can be obviated by non human methods is not well clarified. This mini review primarily strove to uncover any favourable advances in this regard in the context of artificial intelligence that may independently or collectively address the needs of older adults with osteoarthritis who are poor surgical or drug candidates. Using PUBMED, PubMed Central and Google Scholar data bases, an extensive scan covering current discussions and research on osteoarthritis, robots, and robotics shows a sizeable percentage of older adults who suffer from multiple adverse osteoarthritis health complications including musculoskeletal, cognitive, macro and micro tissue disturbances, depression and plus possible neurological and inflammatory manifestations even if they are receiving standard care, may receive some benefit from carefully selected robotically oriented support approaches. Ethical challenges, as well as patient preferences, and know how, plus overall efficacy in face of this complex disease remain to be uncovered. 

Keywords: Complimentary and Alternative Medicine, Management, Older Adults, Osteoarthritis, Robots, Robotics

References 

1. Looije R, Neerincx MA, Cnossen F. Persuasive robotic assistant for health self–management of older adults: design and evaluation of social behaviors. Int J Human– Computer Studies. 2010;68(6):386–397. 

2. Mohammed S, Amirat Y, Rifai H. Lower–limb movement assistance through wearable robots: state of the art and challenges. Advanced Robotics. 2012;26(1–2):1–22. 

3. Xiao L, Kumar V. Robotics for customer service: a useful complement or an ultimate substitute?. J Service Res. 2021;24(1):9–29. 

4. Yao Q, Wu X, Tao C, et al. Osteoarthritis: pathogenic signaling pathways and therapeutic targets. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2023;8(1):56. 

5. Mtewa AG, Bekele T, Amanjot A. Mini–review current trends in complementary and alternative medicine CTCAM–111. Curr Trends Compl Alt Med.;2018(03):1. 

6. Dahl TS, Kamel Boulos MN. Robots in health and social care: a complementary technology to home care and telehealthcare?. Robotics. 2013;3(1):1–21. 

7. Roggio F, Petrigna L, Trovato B, et al. The role of lubricin, irisin and exercise in the prevention and treatment of osteoarthritis. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(6):5126. 

8. Rossbach P Arthrose. Osteoarthritis – Therapy and management. Ther Umsch. 2023;80(1):11–15. 

9. Holden MA, Nicolson PJA, Thomas MJ, et al. Osteoarthritis year in review 2022: rehabilitation. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 202331(2):177–186. 

10. Park YH, Chang HK, Lee MH, et al. Community– dwelling older adults' needs and acceptance regarding the use of robot technology to assist with daily living performance. BMC Geriatr. 2019;19(1):208. 

11. Mitzner TL, Chen TL, Kemp CC, et al. Identifying the potential for robotics to assist older adults in different living environments. Int J Soc Robot. 2014;6(2):213–227. 

12. Fiorini L, Esposito R, Bonaccorsi M, et al. Enabling personalised medical support for chronic disease management through a hybrid robot–cloud approach. Autonomous Robots. 2017;41:1263–1276. 

13. Tiwari P, Warren J, Day KJ, et al. Some non–technology implications for wider application of robots to assist older people. Hlth Care Informatics Rev Online. 2010. 

14. Barata AN. Social robots as a complementary therapy in chronic, progressive diseases. Robotics in Healthcare: Field Examples and Challenges. 2019:95–102. 

15. Vallery H, Van Asseldonk EH, Buss M, et al. Reference trajectory generation for rehabilitation robots: complementary limb motion estimation. IEEE Transactions Neural Systems and Rehabil Engin. 2008;17(1):23–30. 

16. Atukorala I, Hunter DJ. A review of quality–of–life in elderly osteoarthritis. Expert Review Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Res. 2023;23(4):365–381. 

17. Gao RZ, Marriott K, Dickerson CR, et al. Design and preliminary implementation of an air microfluidics enabled soft robotic knee brace towards the management of osteoarthritis. In 2020 42nd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC) 2020 Jul 20 (pp. 4502–4505). IEEE. 

18. Motta F, Barone E, Sica A, et al. Inflammaging and osteoarthritis. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 2023;64(2):222–238. 

19. McGibbon C, Sexton A, Jayaraman A, et al. Evaluation of a lower– extremity robotic exoskeleton for people with knee osteoarthritis. Assistive Technology. 2022;34(5):543–556. 20. 

20. Van Rossom S, Emmerzaal J, van der Straaten R, et al. The biomechanical fingerprint of hip and knee osteoarthritis patients during activities of daily living. Clin Biomech (Bristol,Avon).2023;101:105858. 

21. Huang R, Li H, Suomi R, et al. Intelligent physical robots in health care: systematic literature review. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e39786. 

22. Chu YT, Huang RY, Chen TT, et al. Effect of health literacy and shared decision–making on choice of weight–loss plan among overweight or obese participants receiving a prototype artificial intelligence robot intervention facilitating weight–loss management decisions. Digit Health. 2022;8:20552076221136372. 

23. Lin K, Li Y, Sun J, Zhou D, et al. Multi–sensor fusion for body sensor network in medical human–robot interaction scenario. Information Fusion. 2020;57:15–26. 

24. Litscher G, Schwarz G, Sandner–Kiesling A, et al. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound––robotics–controlled transducers for quantifying the effect of acupuncture. Biomedizinische Technik. Biomedical Engineering. 1997;42(5):116–122. 

25. Sawik B, Tobis S, Baum E, et al. Robots for elderly care: review, multi–criteria optimization model and qualitative case study. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(9):1286. 

26. Pedersini P, Valdes K, Cantero–Tellez R, et al. Effects of neurodynamic mobilizations on pain hypersensitivity in patients with hand osteoarthritis compared to robotic assisted mobilization: a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Care Res. 2021;73(2):232– 239. 

27. Porciuncula F, Roto AV, Kumar D, et al. Wearable movement sensors for rehabilitation: a focused review of technological and clinical advances. PMR. 2018;10(9 Suppl 2):S220–S232. 

28. Cha Y, Yoon H, Park C, et al. Untacted automated robotic upper– trunk–lower reciprocal locomotor training for knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial. J Back Musculoskel Rehabil. 2023;1. 

29. Miyazaki S, Yamako G, Arakawa H, et al. Evaluation of a lower– extremity robotic exoskeleton for people with knee osteoarthritis. Assistive Technology. 2022;34(5):543–556. 

30. Reinsdorf DS, Richburg CA, Czerniecki JM, et al. Development of a robotic unloader brace for investigation of conservative treatment of medial knee osteoarthritis. In 2019 IEEE 16th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR) 2019(pp. 931– 937). IEEE. 

31. Xu T, Xia Y. Guidance for acupuncture robot with potentially utilizing medical robotic technologies. Evid–Based Complementary Alternative Med. 2021;2021. 

32. Litscher G. From basic science to robot–assisted acupuncture. Med Acupunct. 2019;31(3):139–140. 

33. Lawford BJ, Hinman RS, Nelligan RK, et al. "I Could Do It in My Own Time and When I Really Needed It": perceptions of online pain coping skills training for people with knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2020;72(12):1736–1746. 

34. Goldschleger S. New robotic knee brace for osteoarthritis. Aging and (Geron) Technology. 2023;1(1). 

35. Kim MJ, Lee DH, Kim T, et al. Lower extremity exercise of knee osteoarthritis patients using portable assistive robot (HEXAR– KR40P). Int J Precision Engin Manufacturing. 2014;15:2617. 

36. Tore NG, Oskay D, Haznedaroglu S. The quality of physiotherapy and rehabilitation program and the effect of telerehabilitation on patients with knee osteoarthritis. Clin Rheumatol. 2023;42(3):903–915. 

37. Broadbent E, Garrett J, Jepsen N, et al. Using robots at home to support patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: pilot randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(2):e45. 

38. Martinez–Martin E, del Pobil AP. Personal robot assistants for elderly care: an overview. Personal Assistants: Emerging Computational Technologies. 2018:77–91. 

39. Anthony CA, Rojas E, Glass N, et al. A psychological intervention delivered by automated mobile phone messaging stabilized hip and knee function during the COVID–19 pandemic: a randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty. 2022;37(3):431–437.e3. 

40. Robinson H, MacDonald B, Broadbent E. The role of healthcare robots for older people at home: a review. Int J Social Robotics. 2014;6:575–591. 

41. Hudson J, Ungar R, Albright L, et al. Robotic pet use among community–dwelling older adults. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2020;75(9):2018–2028. 

42. Vandemeulebroucke T, Dzi K, Gastmans C. Older adults' experiences with and perceptions of the use of socially assistive robots in aged care: a systematic review of quantitative evidence. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2021;95:104399. 

43. Chiu CJ, Hsieh S, Li CW. Needs and preferences of middle–aged and older adults in Taiwan for companion robots and pets: survey study. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(6):e23471. 

44. Gasteiger N, Ahn HS, Fok C, et al. Older adults' experiences and perceptions of living with Bomy, an assistive dailycare robot: a qualitative study. Assist Technol. 2022;34(4):487–497. 

45. Tiwari P, Warren J, Day K. Comprehensive support for self management of medications by a networked robot for the elderly. Hlth Care Informatics Rev Online. HINZ. 2011;11. 

46. Jakob I, Kollreider A, Germanotta M, et al. Robotic and sensor technology for upper limb rehabilitation. PMR. 2018;10(9 Suppl 2):S189–S197. 

47. Radder B, Prange–Lasonder GB, Kottink AIR, et al. Home rehabilitation supported by a wearable soft–robotic device for improving hand function in older adults: a pilot randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2019;14(8):e0220544. 

48. Mehrholz J, Thomas S, Werner C, et al. Electromechanical–assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;5(5):CD006185. 

49. Gassert R, Dietz V. Rehabilitation robots for the treatment of sensorimotor deficits: a neurophysiological perspective. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018;15(1):46. 

50. Maggioni S, Melendez–Calderon A, van Asseldonk E, et al. Robot–aided assessment of lower extremity functions: a review. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 2;13(1):72. 

51. Bays HE, Fitch A, Cuda S, et al. Artificial intelligence and obesity management: an Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) 2023. Obesity Pillars. 2023;6:100065. 

52. Turjamaa R, Vaismoradi M, Kajander–Unkuri S, et al. Home care professionals' experiences of successful implementation, use and competence needs of robot for medication management in Finland. Nurs Open. 2023;10(4):2088–2097. 

53. Oyibo K, Wang K, Morita PP. Using smart home technologies to promote physical activity among the general and aging populations: scoping review. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e41942. 

54. Ganesan B, Gowda T, Al–Jumaily A, et al. Ambient assisted living technologies for older adults with cognitive and physical impairments: a review. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2019;23(23):10470–10481. 

55. Zhang B, Ma M, Wang Z. Promoting active aging through assistive product design innovation: a preference–based integrated design framework. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1203830. 

56. Pearce AJ, Adair B, Miller K, et al. Robotics to enable older adults to remain living at home. J Aging Res. 2012;2012:538169. 

57. Pasquale III FA. The price of autonomy: liability standards for complementary and substitutive medical robotics and artificial intelligence. Revista Ius et Praxis. 2022;28(1).S International Conference On Signal Processing, Robotics And Automation 2010 Feb 20 (pp. 264–268) 

58. Rogozea L, Leasu F, Repanovici A, et al. Ethics, robotics and medicine development. In Proceedings of the 9th WSEA. 

59. Zhou K, Li YJ, Soderblom EJ, et al. A “best–in–class” systemic biomarker predictor of clinically relevant knee osteoarthritis structural and pain progression. Science Advances. 2023;9(4):eabq5095. 

60. Lan KC, Litscher G. Robot–controlled acupuncture—an innovative step towards modernization of the ancient traditional medical treatment method. Medicines. 2019;6(3):87. 

61. Tanioka R, Sugimoto H, Yasuhara Y, et al. Characteristics of transactive relationship phenomena among older adults, care workers as intermediaries, and the Pepper Robot with care prevention gymnastics exercises. J Med Invest. 2019;66(1.2):46–49. 

62. Leung AYM, Zhao IY, Lin S, et al. Exploring the presence of humanoid social robots at home and capturing human–robot interactions with older adults: experiences from four case studies. Healthcare (Basel). 2022;11(1):39. 

63. Cingolani M, Scendoni R, Fedeli P, et al. Artificial intelligence and digital medicine for integrated home care services in Italy: opportunities and limits. Front Public Health. 2023;10:1095001.