Technical Feasibility of Supervision of Stretching Exercises by a Humanoid Robot Coach for Chronic Low Back Pain: The R-COOL Randomized Trial. (9th March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Blanchard, Agathe; Nguyen, Sao Mai; Devanne, Maxime; Simonnet, Mathieu; Le Goff-Pronost, Myriam; Rémy-Néris, Olivier
• Other Names: de Mauroy Jean C. Academic Editor.
• Is Part Of: BioMed research international. Volume 2022(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-03-09
• Subjects: Medicine -- Periodicals; Biology -- Periodicals; Biotechnology -- Periodicals; Life sciences -- Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1155/2022/5667223
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2314-6133

Abstract

Abstract : Adherence to exercise programs for chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major issue. The R-COOL feasibility study evaluated humanoid robot supervision of exercise for CLBP. Aims are as follows: (1) compare stretching sessions between the robot and a physiotherapist (control), (2) compare clinical outcomes between groups, and (3) evaluate participant perceptions of usability and satisfaction and therapist acceptability of the robot system. Prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind, 2-centre study comparing a 3-week (3 hours/day, 5 days/week) physical activity program. Stretching sessions (30 minutes/day) were supervised by a physiotherapist (control) or the robot. Primary outcome: daily physical activity time (adherence). Secondary outcomes: lumbar pain, disability and fear and beliefs, participant perception of usability (system usability scale) and satisfaction, and physiotherapist acceptability (technology acceptance model). Clinical outcomes were compared between groups with a Student t -test and perceptions with a Wilcoxon test. Data from 27 participants were analysed (n = 15 control and n = 12 robot group). Daily physical activity time did not differ between groups, but adherence declined (number of movements performed with the robot decreased from 82% in the first week to 72% in the second and 47% in the third). None of the clinical outcomes differed between groups. The median system usability scale score was lower in the robot group: 58 (IQR 11.8) points vs. 87 (IQR 9.4) in the control group at 3 weeks (p < 0.001 ). Median physiotherapist rating of the technology acceptance model was <3 points, suggesting a negative opinion of the robot. In conclusion, adherence to robot exercise reduced over time; however, lumbar pain, disability, or fear and beliefs did not differ between groups. The results of the participant questionnaires showed that they were willing to use such a system, although several technical issues suggested the KERAAL system could be improved to provide fully autonomous supervision of physical activity sessions.