Scenarios and Clinical TrialsAnnemarie Kokosy, Gareth Howells, Mohamed Sakel &
Matthew Pepper ISEN/University of Kent/EKHUFT
January 27th, 2012Ecole Centrale of Lille
1Part-financed by the European Regional Development Fund
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
Plan of presentationI. First Scenario
1. Description2. Prototype3. Clinical evaluation
II. Second Scenario4. Description5. Prototype6. Clinical evaluation
III. Third scenario
2
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First Scenario – Collision Avoidance• Description
– The user drives the powered wheelchair via a joystick– The intelligent device must
• Detect obstacles • Slow down the PW proportionally to the distance between the
obstacle and the wheelchair• Stop the PW if the distance between the PW and the obstacles is
less than the security distance, overriding any action by the user • Provide the user with visual feedback on the distance (measured
by the sensors) between the wheelchair and the obstacles in its way
• Have a switch to allow the user to enable or disable the device
3 3
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First ScenarioHardware Implementation at ISEN
• ISEN Prototype– 2 electronic boards: 1 for the joystick and 1 (Arduino) for the
data processing and navigation strategy– 9 US sensors– 2 IR sensors– visual feedback
DupontMedical with DynamicControls
4Invacare Storm 3 with DynamicControls
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First Scenario Hardware Implementation at UoK
• ISEN Prototype– The technical report to replicate the intelligent module
(deliverable A3D1) is available and was sent to University of Kent at the end of November 2011
DupontMedical with DynamicControls
5Invacare Storm 3 with DynamicControls
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First scenarioHardware Implementation at UoK
Prototype at University of Kent INVACARE Harrier Plus wheelchair Dynamics Control System
6
• Processing, Beagle board or equivalent.• Sensor boards, Arduino or equivalent.• Sonar 5m (LV-MaxSonar-EZ4 MB1040). • I/R 5m (SHARP - GP2Y0A710K0F).• I/R 1.2m (SHARP-P2Y0A02YK0F).• Optical camera and Fisheye lens.• Magnetic compass (CMPS10).• Floor colour sensor (Inex).• Dynamic object sensor (GE/ ZTP-135S).• Drive shaft angular rate (existing motor).• Angular body rate (MLX90609-E2).• Acceleration/velocity (ADXL320).• Position (optical mouse sensor).
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First scenario• Clinical Trial: Hospital of Garches
7 7
First partSecond part
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First scenario: Clinical Trial - HG• Pilot study of 27 people divided into 3 groups
– Group1: 9 healthy volunteers who have never driven an electric wheelchair
– Group2: 9 experienced electric wheelchair users– Group3: 9 users who didn’t pass the electric wheelchair
driver’s licence
• Goal: reduce the number and severity of collisions • Methodology: create a circuit that simulates a real life
indoor environment (walls, doors, obstacles)
8 8
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First scenario: Clinical Trial - HG• Evaluation Criteria: the number of collisions during the
test, and the time the user needed to finish it.• Total duration of the test: 3 hours• Duration of the study: 5 months• Ethics Approvals: The clinical protocol has been approved
by AFSSAPS (French agency for health and sanitary security) and the CPP (Commission for the protection of people) at the end of December 2011
» The clinical protocol and the observation booklet were sent to EKHUFT in November 2011
9 9
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First Scenario: Clinical Trial - HG• 3 users (from groups 1 & 3), have already taken
the test• Some technical problems were identified
– To go through doors (90cm)– To navigate along the corridor with obstacles (distance wall
– obstacle = 1m)– For reverse navigationSolution (in progress)
• To better locate the sensors to reduce dead zones• To change the navigation strategy
10 10
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First Scenario: Clinical Trial - EKHUFT
• Pilot Study to Confirm Findings from HG– 9 healthy volunteers – 9 Patients selected by Dr Sakel
• Provision of ISEN interface by UoK - ?• Testing of ISEN Interface at UoK - ?• Ethics Approval: The clinical protocol has to be developed
and application made to the National Research Ethics System via the Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) – October 2012
11 11
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
First Scenario: Clinical Evaluation - EKHUFT
• Repeated for each patient over Hospital stay• Evaluation Criteria:
– Number of collisions during the completion of the clinical test path– The time to complete the path.
• Patient Evaluation/Experience – Questionnaire to be developed
• Subject Participation duration: 1hour?• Duration of the study: 5 months• Possibly at same time as Scenario 2?
12 12
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
Second scenario (HG)• Description
– The user drives the powered wheelchair using a joystick– The intelligent device must
• Detect obstacles• Detect Steps/Stairs • Avoid obstacles, overriding any user action if necessary• Go autonomously through doorways• Provide feedback to the user (must be visual or audible)• Have a switch to allow the user to enable or disable the device• Have a switch to allow the user to enable the “pass through
doorways” mode
13
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
Second scenario• Prototype: new challenges
• Obstacle avoidance idea: use the potential field method (the joystick direction=attractor; obstacles = repulsor)
• Second prototype vs first one– Use of US and IR sensors for obstacle detection– Use the Arduino board for data processing– New data: camera and/or laser for position and velocity estimations– Use of a PC or mother board (If PC not allowed for the ethics approval)
for data processing and navigation algorithm– What kind of device for the user's feedback ?– A switch to change between the autonomous or semi-autonomous
navigation
14 14
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
Second scenario• Prototype: who uses what kind of sensors and
for which goal?
15 15
ISEN/EC Lille University of Kent
University of Essex
US and IR Obstacle detection
localisation perception
camera localisation localization
Kinect perception
Laser perception
Inertial sensors localization
GPS localization
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
Second scenario• Main results
16 16
ISEN/EC Lille University of Kent University of Essex
Localization Use one cameraand one or two landmarks (OK on simulation)
Use US (indoor), GPS (outdoor), inertial navigation system on the real robots
Perception Use of US and IR sensorsStatic obstaclesDrawback: the system is too slow
? Kinect, laser, camera, to build the maps (SLAM)
Speed estimation Use one cameraand one or two landmarks (OK on simulation)Observers and estimators
Inertial navigation system
Path Planning Michel A*
Tracking and Control Sarah & Thierry PID Control, Fuzzy (Huosheng)
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
Second Scenario: Clinical trial• Hospital of Garches
– Define the clinical protocol with the SYSIASS team– Ask for the Ethics approval– Initial Evaluation of the prototype in a clinical environment
– January 2013?
17 17
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
Third Scenario• Based on the first results of the survey on user
needs• Survey
– Start date: November 2011 – End date: April 2012– Questionnaire available in French and English on our web
site (www.sysiass.eu)– Realized by ISEN/GHICL in collaboration with 2
rehabilitation centers (Berck sur Mer and Villeneuve d’Ascq) and the Social Institute of Lille
18 18
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
• First results of survey: ConclusionScenario 1: collision avoidance
The intelligent device doesn’t correct the trajectory
Scenario2: assisted navigation in semi-autonomous way The user drives the powered wheelchair The intelligent device avoids obstacles with the user action on the loop The going through doorways is autonomous (the user chooses this
option)
The survey results allow us to define a third scenario: autonomous navigation
EKHUFT also proposes a scenario (see the next presentation)
19 19
Third scenario
Part-financed by the European
Regional Development Fund
Project plan – Time line
20 20
Feb/2012 Aug/2012 Feb/2013 Aug/2013 31Dec/2013End
1st scenarioTechnical work
4/12 6/12 10/12 12/12 4/13 6/13 10/13 12/13
Clinical trials
2nd scenario
3rd scenario
Technical work
Clinical trials
Technical work
Clinical trialsEthics Approval
Ethics Approval