Title Page
Contents
STUDY 1. EFFECTS OF 4-WEEKS EXERCISE PROGRAM USING AN WEARALBE HIP ROBOT ON THE PHYSICAL FUNCTION OF OLDER ADULTS 15
ABSTRACT 16
Ⅰ. INTRODUCTION 17
A. Background 17
B. Purposes of the Study 21
C. Hypotheses 22
D. The Definition of Terms 23
Ⅱ. LITERATURE REVIEWS 25
A. Physical and functional problems of older adults 25
B. Exercise with wearable robots 27
Ⅲ. METHODS 33
A. Experimental Design 33
B. Subjects and Experimental Procedures 34
C. Experimental Methods 37
D. EX1 40
E. Assessment Tools and Data Collection 42
F. Experimental Variables 47
G. Data Analysis 48
Ⅳ. RESULTS 49
A. General Characteristics of Subject 49
B. Comparison of spatio-temporal parameters between pre-, post- intervention 50
C. Comparison of kinematic parameters between pre-, post- intervention 52
D. Comparison of physical functions between pre-, post- intervention 54
E. Comparison of muscle activity, thickness and waist-hip ratio between pre-, post- intervention 56
Ⅴ. DISCUSSION 58
Ⅵ. CONCLUSION 66
REFERENCES 67
STUDY 2. EFFECTS OF 6-WEEKS WALKING EXERCISE PROGRAM USING AN WEARABLE HIP ROBOT ON THE PHYSICAL FUNCTION OF OLDER ADULTS 75
ABSTRACT 76
Ⅰ. INTRODUCTION 77
A. Background 77
B. Purposes of the Study 83
C. Hypotheses 84
D. The Definition of Terms 85
Ⅱ. LITERATURE REVIEWS 87
A. Exercise program for older adults 87
Ⅲ. METHODS 93
A. Experimental Design 93
B. Subjects and Experimental Procedures 94
C. Experimental Methods 98
D. EX1 101
E. Assessment Tools and Data Collection 103
F. Experimental Variables 108
G. Data Analysis 109
Ⅳ. RESULTS 110
A. General Characteristics of Subject 110
B. Comparison of spatio-temporal parameters between two groups 111
C. Comparison of kinematic parameters between two groups 113
D. Comparison of physical functions between two groups 116
E. Comparison of muscle activity, thickness and waist-hip ratio between two groups 117
Ⅴ. DISCUSSION 120
Ⅵ. CONCLUSION 126
REFERENCES 127
APPENDICES 134
APPENDIX 1. EX1 134
APPENDIX 2. Practical Application 136
APPENDIX 3. Experimental Assessment Tool (G-Walk) 138
APPENDIX 4. Experimental Assessment Tool (Inbody) 140
APPENDIX 5. Experimental Assessment Tool (RUSI) 142
APPENDIX 6. Muscle thickness in RUSI 144
APPENDIX 7. Experimental Assessment Tool (EMG) 146
APPENDIX 8. Experimental Assessment Method (TUG) 148
APPENDIX 9. Experimental Assessment Method (OLST) 150
APPENDIX 10. Experimental Assessment Method (GAITRite) 152
APPENDIX 11. Consent Form for Participation in a Clinical Trial 154
APPENDIX 12. Recruitment of Experiment Participants 156
Table 1. Studies of exercise with wearable robots 29
Table 2. Fitness exercise composition 39
Table 3. Independent and Dependent Variables of Study 47
Table 4. General Characteristics of Subject 49
Table 5. Changes of spatio-temporal parameters 50
Table 6. Changes of kinematic parameters 52
Table 7. Changes of functional evaluation parameters 54
Table 8. Changes of muscle activity, thickness and WHR 56
Table 9. Studies of exercise programs for older adults 89
Table 10. Interval walking exercise composition 100
Table 11. Independent and Dependent Variables of Study 108
Table 12. General Characteristics of Subject 110
Table 13. Changes of spatio-temporal parameters 111
Table 14. Changes of kinematic parameters 113
Table 15. Changes of functional evaluation parameters 116
Table 16. Changes of muscle activity, thickness and WHR 117
Figure 1. Experimental Design. 33
Figure 2. Experimental diagram 36
Figure 3. Comparison of stride length between pre- and post- exercise, **p〈0.01 51
Figure 4. Comparison of propulsion between pre- and post- exercise, **p〈0.01 51
Figure 5. Comparison of pelvic tilt range between pre- and post- exercise, **p〈0.01 53
Figure 6. Comparison of pelvic rotation range between pre- and post- exercise, **p〈0.01 53
Figure 7. Comparison of TUG TD between pre- and post- exercise, TUG TD=Timed up and go test time duration, *p〈0.05 55
Figure 8. Comparison of quadriceps thickness between pre- and post- exercise, **p〈0.01 57
Figure 9. Comparison of WHR between pre- and post- exercise, WHR=Waist-hip ratio, *p〈0.05 57
Figure 10. Experimental Design. 93
Figure 11. Experimental diagram 97
Figure 12. Comparison of step time difference between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist group... 112
Figure 13. Comparison of pelvic tilt range between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist group,... 114
Figure 14. Comparison of pelvic tilt range between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist group,... 114
Figure 15. Comparison of pelvic rotation range between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist group, **p〈0.01... 115
Figure 16. Comparison of pelvic rotation range between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist... 115
Figure 17. Comparison of RA (during stance phase) between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist group;... 118
Figure 18. Comparison of BF (during stance phase) between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist group;... 118
Figure 19. Comparison of RA contraction ratio between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist group;... 119
Figure 20. Comparison of WHR between two groups, RG=Robot assist group; NRG=Non robot assist group; WHR=Waist-hip ratio... 119
Supplementary Figure 1. EX1 135
Supplementary Figure 2. Interval walking exercise using the EX1 137
Supplementary Figure 3. G-Walk 139
Supplementary Figure 4. Inbody 141
Supplementary Figure 5. Measuring RA by RUSI 143
Supplementary Figure 6. RA thickness (top) and Quadriceps thickness (bottom) before and after combined exercise program using the EX1 145
Supplementary Figure 7. Measuring BF by EMG 147
Supplementary Figure 8. TUG 149
Supplementary Figure 9. OLST 151
Supplementary Figure 10. GAITRite 153