Literature DB >> 29110728

How a diverse research ecosystem has generated new rehabilitation technologies: Review of NIDILRR's Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers.

David J Reinkensmeyer1, Sarah Blackstone2, Cathy Bodine3, John Brabyn4, David Brienza5, Kevin Caves6, Frank DeRuyter6, Edmund Durfee7, Stefania Fatone8, Geoff Fernie9, Steven Gard8, Patricia Karg5, Todd A Kuiken10, Gerald F Harris11, Mike Jones12, Yue Li9, Jordana Maisel13, Michael McCue5, Michelle A Meade7, Helena Mitchell14, Tracy L Mitzner14, James L Patton15, Philip S Requejo16, James H Rimmer17, Wendy A Rogers14, W Zev Rymer18, Jon A Sanford14, Lawrence Schneider7, Levin Sliker3, Stephen Sprigle14, Aaron Steinfeld19, Edward Steinfeld13, Gregg Vanderheiden20, Carolee Winstein21, Li-Qun Zhang10, Thomas Corfman22.   

Abstract

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a "total approach to rehabilitation", combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970's, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Disability; Rehabilitation engineering; Technology

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29110728      PMCID: PMC5674748          DOI: 10.1186/s12984-017-0321-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil        ISSN: 1743-0003            Impact factor:   4.262


  224 in total

Review 1.  Future AAC technology needs: consumer perspectives.

Authors:  Sarah W Blackstone; Michael B Williams; Mick Joyce
Journal:  Assist Technol       Date:  2002

2.  The 'shape&roll' prosthetic foot: I. Design and development of appropriate technology for low-income countries.

Authors:  Michel Sam; Dudley S Childress; Andrew H Hansen; Margrit R Meier; Sophie Lambla; Edward C Grahn; Joshua S Rolock
Journal:  Med Confl Surviv       Date:  2004 Oct-Dec

3.  Safety, usability, and independence for wheelchair-seated drivers and front-row passengers of private vehicles: a qualitative research study.

Authors:  Linda van Roosmalen; Nichole Ritchie Orton; Lawrence Schneider
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2013

Review 4.  The intersection of disability and healthcare disparities: a conceptual framework.

Authors:  Michelle A Meade; Elham Mahmoudi; Shoou-Yih Lee
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil       Date:  2014-07-25       Impact factor: 3.033

5.  National survey of the use of assistive technology by adults with mental retardation.

Authors:  M L Wehmeyer
Journal:  Ment Retard       Date:  1998-02

6.  Response of able-bodied persons to changes in shoe rocker radius during walking: changes in ankle kinematics to maintain a consistent roll-over shape.

Authors:  Charles C Wang; Andrew H Hansen
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2010-05-18       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 7.  Transmission of pictorial information through the skin.

Authors:  C C Collins; P Bach-y-Rita
Journal:  Adv Biol Med Phys       Date:  1973

8.  The epidemiology and impact of traumatic brain injury: a brief overview.

Authors:  Jean A Langlois; Wesley Rutland-Brown; Marlena M Wald
Journal:  J Head Trauma Rehabil       Date:  2006 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.710

9.  Roll-over shapes of the ankle-foot and knee-ankle-foot systems of able-bodied children.

Authors:  Andrew H Hansen; Margrit R Meier
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 2.063

Review 10.  Dual sensory loss: overview of problems, visual assessment, and rehabilitation.

Authors:  John A Brabyn; Marilyn E Schneck; Gunilla Haegerstrom-Portnoy; Lori A Lott
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2007-12
View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Research in the Acute Rehabilitation Setting: a Bridge Too Far?

Authors:  Preeti Raghavan
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 5.081

Review 2.  Tracking the evolution of virtual reality applications to rehabilitation as a field of study.

Authors:  Emily A Keshner; Patrice Tamar Weiss; Dorit Geifman; Daphne Raban
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 4.262

3.  A Mobile App to Optimize Social Participation for Individuals with Physical Disabilities: Content Validation and Usability Testing.

Authors:  Dahlia Kairy; Mir Abolfazl Mostafavi; Catherine Blanchette-Dallaire; Eva Belanger; Andrea Corbeil; Meena Kandiah; Tian Qiang Wu; Barbara Mazer
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  JNER at 15 years: analysis of the state of neuroengineering and rehabilitation.

Authors:  David J Reinkensmeyer
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 4.262

Review 5.  Converging Robotic Technologies in Targeted Neural Rehabilitation: A Review of Emerging Solutions and Challenges.

Authors:  Kostas Nizamis; Alkinoos Athanasiou; Sofia Almpani; Christos Dimitrousis; Alexander Astaras
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 3.576

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.