| Literature DB >> 35720909 |
Xiaojun Zhou1,2, S Ruhaizin1, Wei Zhu2, Cheng Shen2, Xiaobo He3.
Abstract
The smart wheelchair is a service robot that can be used as a means of transportation for the elderly and the disabled. The patients were given an intelligent wheelchair designed by electroencephalogram (EEG), which was used for more than 8 hours and tested continuously for 1 month. By ridit analysis, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (U = 3.72, P < 0.01). The scores of visual analogue scale (VAS) and joint ground visuality (JGV) in the observation group were significantly better than those in the control group. The modules of physiological function (PF), physical pain (PP), overall health (OH), vitality (VT), social function (SF), emotional function (EF), and mental health (MH) in the SF-36 scores of the two groups were significantly improved (P < 0.05), and the improvement of each module in the observation group was significantly better than that in the control group (P < 0.05). The levels of serum IL-6, IL-10, and superoxide dismutase (SOD) in the two groups were significantly improved (P < 0.05), and the improvement of serum IL-6, IL-10, and SOD in the observation group was significantly better than that in the control group (P < 0.05). It is suggested that neural engineering based on EEG characteristics can be well applied in comfort industrial design.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35720909 PMCID: PMC9205692 DOI: 10.1155/2022/4667689
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Comparison of EEG improvement effects between the two groups.
| Group |
| Cure | Good | Well | Invalid | Efficient (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observation | 34 | 18 | 9 | 7 | 2 | 97.06 |
| Control | 34 | 11 | 7 | 9 | 7 | 76.47 |
P < 0.01.
Comparison of VAS score and JGV score between the two groups before and after treatment ().
| Group |
| VAS | JGV | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | ||
| Observation | 34 | 7.12 ± 1.76 | 1.29 ± 0.41##△△ | 67.78 ± 10.53 | 33.32 ± 3.31##△△ |
| Control | 34 | 6.96 ± 1.71 | 3.21 ± 0.98## | 66.66 ± 11.27 | 45.38 ± 7.73## |
Comparison of SF-36 scores between the two groups before and after treatment ().
| Items |
| Before treatment | After treatment | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Observation | Control | Observation | ||
| PF | 34 | 41.13 ± 8.81 | 43.67 ± 8.26 | 66.56 ± 8.63## | 76.67 ± 3.43##△△ |
| RP | 34 | 45.23 ± 9.48 | 46.67 ± 7.68 | 65.35 ± 8.49## | 78.36 ± 4.91##△△ |
| BP | 34 | 43.26 ± 9.14 | 44.56 ± 8.71 | 71.67 ± 9.281## | 84.26 ± 6.37##△△ |
| CH | 34 | 44.57 ± 8.16 | 44.62 ± 7.36 | 71.34 ± 5.52## | 86.79 ± 5.32##△△ |
| VT | 34 | 46.67 ± 5.36 | 46.25 ± 5.68 | 71.25 ± 4.36## | 84.16 ± 5.46##△△ |
| SF | 34 | 52.87 ± 10.15 | 52.26 ± 9.59 | 62.47 ± 4.36## | 79.35 ± 3.27##△△ |
| RE | 34 | 50.67 ± 6.48 | 53.67 ± 6.34 | 69.88 ± 1.81## | 85.25 ± 5.41##△△ |
| MH | 34 | 53.57 ± 8.66 | 52.36 ± 9.56 | 71.89 ± 7.16## | 84.37 ± 7.28##△△ |
Comparison of serum IL-6, IL-10, and SOD levels between the two groups before and after treatment ().
| Items |
| Before treatment | After treatment | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Observation | Control | Observation | ||
| IL-6 (ng·L−1) | 34 | 167.13 ± 23.27 | 173.25 ± 25.83 | 80.68 ± 17.31## | 40.84 ± 10.36##△△ |
| IL-10 (ng·L−1) | 34 | 17.35 ± 7.83 | 17.24 ± 8.37 | 29.27 ± 11.37## | 42.63 ± 10.36##△△ |
| SOD (U·ml−1) | 34 | 89.75 ± 18.27 | 88.46 ± 19.27 | 156.37 ± 34.26## | 236.73 ± 36.74##△△ |