1. Reducing Robotic Guidance During Robot-Assisted Gait Training Improves Gait Function: A Case Report on a Stroke Survivor 
Chandramouli Krishnan, PT, PhD, Despina Kotsapouikis, DPT, Yasin Y. Dhaher, PhD, William Z. Rymer, MD, PhD 
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 
Volume 94, Issue 6, Pages (June 2013)
DOI: /j.apmr
Copyright © 2013 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine Terms and Conditions

2. Fig 1
Schematic flowchart of the study design (A). Clinical outcomes after conventional (full guidance) and cooperative control (reduced guidance) robotic gait training (B). Note that the changes observed after cooperative control training are fairly larger than the 1 SEM values (which is a common coefficient used to assess whether the changes are clinically meaningful) established in the literature for the stroke population. Abbreviations: LE, lower extremity; SEM, standard error of measurement established in the literature for the stroke population.
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation  , DOI: ( /j.apmr )
Copyright © 2013 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine Terms and Conditions

3. Fig 2
Conceptual representation of cooperative control strategy, shown in endpoint space instead of joint space for easier interpretation. The reference trajectory in the figure represents the desired spatial path of the ankle trajectory (ie, x-y position of lateral malleolus in space during walking). A virtual tunnel (shaded region) is created by adding a tolerance zone around the reference trajectory. The virtual walls of the tunnel (ie, tunnel boundaries) keep the subject's leg within the tunnel by applying constraining forces when leg postures are outside the tunnel. Transparency-enhancing forces compensate for robot dynamics inside the tunnel, and therefore the subject does not feel the weight of the robot.
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation  , DOI: ( /j.apmr )
Copyright © 2013 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine Terms and Conditions