Wireless intraoral tongue control of an assistive robotic arm for individuals with tetraplegia.
Lotte N S Andreasen Struijk, Line Lindhardt Egsgaard, Romulus Lontis and 2 others
PMID 29110736WHAT IT FOUND
A person with tetraplegia used a tongue interface and robotic arm system to touch a tape roll in 100% of attempts and lift it in 50%.
This is a small demonstration, not evidence it works for daily life.
Key findings
01The participant with tetraplegia touched the tape roll in 100% of the 10 attempts and picked it up in 50%.
02The able-bodied participant picked up the tape roll 8 times and touched but dropped it 2 times in 10 trials.
03The participant with tetraplegia used the robot to pick up a bottle and pour water into a cup successfully.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included one person with tetraplegia and one able-bodied person, so it cannot show how many other people could use the system. Both participants had prior experience with tongue interfaces, so the training time and success for a new user are unclear. The functional task was a short laboratory trial, not a test of activities of daily living at home. The tetraplegia participant had difficulty seeing the gripper position because of distance from the robot, which may have contributed to dropped attempts. The system used several components together, including the tongue interface, central unit, computer, software, and robotic arm, so the contribution of any single component cannot be separated. The authors' statements about quality of life and reducing personal assistance are expectations, not measured outcomes.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that tongue-controlled robotic arm systems restore independence in tetraplegia. The study was a short laboratory demonstration with one person with tetraplegia and one able-bodied person, and it did not test home use, long-term training, or comparison with other control methods.