The purpose of the study was to substantiate theoretically the need in high-tech rehabilitation tools for children with cerebral palsy, to identify the shortcomings of their use and to determine the role of the equipment in correcting the pathological stereotype of movement. Materials and methods. Methodological approach was used: analysis of literature sources and resources of the Internet (foreign and domestic on the PubMed and Google Scholar platforms), method of system analysis, method of comparison. Results and discussion. One of the main goals in the process of rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy is to improve motor control and, thus, increase independence, participation and overall quality of life. In the modern world, the use of new methods of exercise therapy using high-tech robotic devices («Lokomat», «Armeo»), as well as new methods of physiotherapy, in particular, translingual electrical stimulation of the brain (TESB) «Brain-port» is becoming relevant for the treatment of children with cerebral palsy. Features and some restrictions of use of the above-stated devices were defined. Exercises on the Lokomat device help to form a motor "stereotype" of physiological walking, as well as strengthen the muscles of the lower extremities, and with the help of biological feedback to increase the motivation to exercise in children. The therapeutic goals of Armeo are to improve or maintain reach, capture and transmission movements, active range of motion by attaching an exoskeleton to the patient's arm. Translingual neurostimulation plays an important role in modulating neuroplastic changes in the brain, provides electrical stimulation of trigeminal and facial cranial nerves that modulate sensorimotor and vestibular functions. The devices help to improve the static and dynamic function of the body, reduce muscle tone, improve joint mobility in children with cerebral palsy. Their use in the process of physical therapy emphasizes the need for individualization of rehabilitation programs. Conclusion. The analysis of literature sources testifies to the effectiveness of the use of high-tech tools in the process of rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy in combination with traditional methods. It helps to improve motor and cognitive function in children with cerebral palsy by correcting the mechanism of musculoskeletal control. Robotic techniques allow to change the pathological stereotype of movement. The prospect is to study the psychophysiological parameters of children with cerebral palsy during rehabilitation using modern technologies

Keywords: cerebral palsy, high-tech rehabilitation, motor function

Full text: PDF (Ukr) 314K

1. Blair E, Watson L. Epidemiology of cerebral palsy. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2006;11(2):117–25. PMID: 16338186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2005.10.010
2. O'Shea M. Cerebral palsy. Semin Perinatol. 2008 Feb;32(1):35-41. PMID: 18249238. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2007.12.008
3. Surveillance of Cerebral Palsy in Europe. Surveillance of cerebral palsy in Europe: a collaboration of cerebral palsy surveys and registers. Surveillance of Cerebral Palsy in Europe (SCPE). Dev Med Child Neurol. 2000;42(12):816-24. PMID: 11132255. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0012162200001511
4. Cans C, de-la-Cruz J, Mermet MA. Epidemiology of cerebral palsy. Symposium: Special needs. Pediatr Child Health. 2008;18:393–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paed.2008.05.015
5. Keller JW, van Hedel HJA. Weight-supported training of the upper extremity in children with cerebral palsy: a motor learning study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017 Aug 30;14(1):87. PMID: 28854939. PMCID: PMC5577664. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-017-0293-3
6. Krakauer JW. Motor learning: its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Curr Opin Neurol. 2006;19(1):84–90. PMID: 16415682/ https://doi.org/10.1097/01.wco.0000200544.29915.cc
7. Kitago T, Krakauer JW. Motor learning principles for neurorehabilitation. Handb Clin Neurol. 2013;110:93-103. PMID: 23312633. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-52901-5.00008-3
8. Colombo G, Joerg M, Schreier R, Dietz V. Treadmill training of paraplegic patients using a robotic orthosis. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000 Nov-Dec;37(6):693-700. PMID: 11321005
9. Ryan JL, Wright FV, Levac DE. Exploring Physiotherapists' Use of Motor Learning Strategies in Gait-Based Interventions for Children with Cerebral Palsy. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2020;40(1):79-92. PMID: 31154883. PMCID: PMC6864228. https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2019.1622623
10. Ryan JL, Levac DE, Wright FV. Reliability of the Motor Learning Strategies Rating Instrument in physiotherapy intervention for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2019 Sep;61(9):1061-1066. PMID: 30740648. PMCID: PMC6753581. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.14177
11. Deineko VV, Krysyuk OB, Safonov LV, Shurygin SN. Sovremennye vozmozhnosti i prognoz fizicheskoi reabilitatsii detei s tserebral'nym paralichom [Modern opportunities and prognosis of physical rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy]. Zh Nevrol Psikhiatr im SS Korsakova. 2020;120(6):88-91. [Russian]. PMID: 32678553. https://doi.org/10.17116/jnevro202012006188
12. Riener R, Lünenburger L, Maier IC, Colombo G, Dietz V. Locomotor training in subjects with sensori-motor deficits: an overview of the robotic gait orthosis lokomat. J Healthc Eng. 2010;1:197-216 https://doi.org/10.1260/2040-2295.1.2.197
13. Meyer-Heim A, Borggraefe I, Ammann-Reiffer C, Berweck S, Sennhauser FH, Colombo G, Knecht B, Heinen F. Feasibility of robotic-assisted locomotor training in children with central gait impairment. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2007 Dec;49(12):900-6. PMID: 18039236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2007.00900.x
14. Kaelin-Lang A, Sawaki L, Cohen LG. Role of voluntary drive in encoding an elementary motor memory. J Neurophysiol. 2005 Feb;93(2):1099-103. PMID: 15456807. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00143.2004
15. Van Kammen K, Reinders-Messelink HA, Elsinghorst AL, Wesselink CF, Meeuwisse-de Vries B, van der Woude LHV, Boonstra AM, den Otter R. Amplitude and stride-to-stride variability of muscle activity during Lokomat guided walking and treadmill walking in children with cerebral palsy. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2020 Nov;29:108-117. PMID: 32900595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpn.2020.08.003
16. Van Kammen K, Boonstra A, Reinders-Messelink H, den Otter R. The combined effects of body weight support and gait speed on gait related muscle activity: a comparison between walking in the Lokomat exoskeleton and regular treadmill walking. PLoS One. 2014 Sep 16;9(9):e107323. PMID: 25226302. PMCID: PMC4167325. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0107323
17. Clerici I, Ferrazzoli D, Maestri R, Bossio F, Zivi I, Canesi M, et al. Rehabilitation in progressive supranuclear palsy: Effectiveness of two multidisciplinary treatments. PLoS One. 2017 Feb 3;12(2):e0170927. PMID: 28158197. PMCID: PMC5291505. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170927
18. Wallard L, Dietrich G, Kerlirzin Y, Bredin J. Robotic-assisted gait training improves walking abilities in diplegic children with cerebral palsy. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2017 May;21(3):557-564. PMID: 28188024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpn.2017.01.012
19. Diep D, Lam ACL, Ko G. A Review of the Evidence and Current Applications of Portable Translingual Neurostimulation Technology. Neuromodulation. 2021 Dec;24(8):1377-1387. PMID: 32881193. https://doi.org/10.1111/ner.13260.
20. Cherni Y, Ballaz L, Lemaire J, Dal Maso F, Begon M. Effect of low dose robotic-gait training on walking capacity in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy. Neurophysiol Clin. 2020 Nov;50(6):507-519. PMID: 33011059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucli.2020.09.005
21. El-Shamy SM. Efficacy of Armeo® Robotic Therapy Versus Conventional Therapy on Upper Limb Function in Children With Hemiplegic Cerebral Palsy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Mar;97(3):164-169. PMID: 29059068. https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000000852
22. Wildenberg JC, Tyler ME, Danilov YP, Kaczmarek KA, Meyerand ME. Altered connectivity of the balance processing network after tongue stimulation in balance-impaired individuals. Brain Connect. 2013;3:87–97. https://doi.org/10.1089/brain.2012.0123
23. Danilov Y, Paltin D. Translingual neurostimulation (TLNS): perspective on a novel approach to neurorehabilitation after brain injury. In: Pre-Clinical and Clinical Methods in Brain Trauma Research. Eds by AK Srivastava, CS. Cox. NY: Springer; 2018 p. 307–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-8564-7_19
24. Smith CJ, Livingstone A, Fickling SD, Tannouri P, Campbell NKJ, Lakhani B, et al. Brain Vital Signs Detect Information Processing Differences When Neuromodulation Is Used During Cognitive Skills Training. Front Hum Neurosci. 2020 Sep 14;14:358. PMID: 33117138. PMCID: PMC7521129. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00358
25. Kaczmarek KA. The tongue display unit (TDU) for electrotactile spatiotemporal pattern presentation. Sci Iran D Comput Sci Eng Electr Eng. 2011 Dec;18(6):1476-1485. PMID: 28748231. PMCID: PMC5523951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scient.2011.08.020