SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Range of Motion and Intensity Achieved During a Single Session of Targeted Robot-Assisted Exercise in Individuals with Parkinson's Disease: A Pilot Study.

Sensors (Basel) · 2026-02-07

DOI: 10.3390/s26041091PMID: 41755033

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The goal of this study was to determine if a robot-assisted exercise system could lead individuals with Parkinson's disease (PD) through different joint ranges of motion in a fun and effective manner. Eleven individuals with PD participated. A novel robotic system placed a target at different places in space for participants to tap with their hand, foot or knee. The range of motion (ROM) was collected by inertial measurement units (APDM), and was extracted using a custom code (Matlab). ROM was dependent upon the exercise and joint of interest. Participants illustrated acceptable levels of fatigue during each session, based on an average ending heart rate of 107.0 ± 11.9 bpm (~70% of maxHR) and an ending RPE of 6.5 ± 1.8 on a 10-point scale, indicating that the sessions were appropriately challenging. Standing forward reach, used to assess static balance and flexibility, improved by an average of 1.7 inches (p < 0.01), demonstrating immediate improvements from exercising with the robot. The results demonstrate the potential benefits of exercising with a robotic exercise system. The number of sessions spent with a PT can be limited by availability, so this system could be a fun way to encourage individuals with PD to complete their PT exercises at home.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.