search
Back to results

Efficacy of End-Effector Robot-Assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients

Primary Purpose

Severe Stroke, Acute Stroke, Mild Stroke

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Italy
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Robot-Assisted Gait Training (RAGT)
Sponsored by
IRCCS San Raffaele Roma
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Severe Stroke focused on measuring Stroke, Robot, Hemiparesis, Gait Training, Rehabilitation, Functional Recovery, Robot-Assisted Gait Training

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 80 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • first cerebral stroke
  • 2 weeks up to 6 months post the acute event (subacute patients)
  • age between 18-80 years
  • ability to fit into the end-effector footplates
  • no significant limitation of joint range of motion
  • ability to tolerate upright standing for 60 seconds
  • ability to walk unassisted or with little assistance
  • ability to give written consent
  • compliance with the study procedures

Exclusion Criteria:

  • contractures of the hip, knee, or ankle joints that might limit the range of motion during gait
  • medical issue that precludes full weight bearing and ambulation (e.g. orthopaedic injuries, pain, severe osteoporosis, or severe spasticity)
  • cognitive and/or communicative disability (e.g. due to brain injury): inability to understand the instructions required for the study
  • cardiac pathologies, anxiety or psychosis that might interfere with the use of the equipment or testing

Written informed consent was obtained from each subject.

Sites / Locations

  • IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana
  • Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

No Intervention

Arm Label

Robotic Group (RG)

Conventional Group (CG)

Arm Description

Robotic Group (RG) will perform, in addition to conventional therapy, gait training using an end-effector robotic device for Robot-Assisted Gait Training (RAGT), 3 times/week for 20 sessions. During the training, patients will be asked to walk, at a varying speed, for 45 minutes and a partial Body Weight Support (BWS). Participants will start with 30-40% of BWS and an initial speed of 1.5 km/h; increasing to a maximum of between 2.2 and 2.5 km/h and reducing the initial BWS to 15%. The therapist will provide any help during sessions if required. Over 45 minutes, the patient simulates a minimum of 300 steps; patients could rest during the session, though they will be asked to walk continuously for a minimum of 5 minutes during each session.

Conventional Group (CG) will perform conventional gait rehabilitation program. The treatment will include: muscle strengthening exercises and stretching of the lower limb, and static and dynamic exercises for the recovery of balance in the supine and standing positions using assistive devices; training gait exercises with parallel bars or in open spaces performed both with and without assistive devices; training to climb up and down stairs; exercises to improve proprioception in the supine, sitting and standing positions, using a proprioceptive footboard; exercises to improve trunk control.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Change in Six-Minute Walking Test (6MWT)
The 6MWT measures the distance a subject covers during an indoor gait on a flat, hard surface in 6 minutes, using assistive devices, as necessary. The test is a reliable and valid evaluation of functional exercise capacity and is used as a sub-maximal test of aerobic capacity and endurance. The minimal detectable change in distance for people with sub-acute stroke is 60.98 meters. The 6MWT is a patient self-paced walk test and assesses the level of functional capacity. Patients are allowed to stop and rest during the test. However, the timer does not stop. If the patient is unable to complete the test, the time is stopped at that moment. The missing time and the reason of the stop are recorded. This test will be administered while wearing a pulse oximeter to monitor heart rate and oxygen saturation, also integrated with Borg scale to assess dyspnea.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Change in Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) scale
The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) is a stroke-specific, performance-based impairment index. It is designed to assess motor functioning, balance, sensation and joint functioning in patients with post-stroke hemiplegia. It is applied clinically and in research to determine disease severity, describe motor recovery, and to plan and assess treatment. The scale is comprised of five domains and there are 155 items in total: Motor functioning (the score ranges from 0 (hemiplegia) to 100 points (normal motor performance). Divided into 66 points for upper extremity and 34 points for the lower extremity. Sensory functioning (from 0 to 24 points) Balance (from 0 to 14) Joint range of motion (from 0 to 44) Joint pain (from 0 to 44 ) Scale items are scored on the basis of ability to complete the item using a 3-point ordinal scale where 0=cannot perform, 1=performs partially and 2=performs fully. The total possible scale score is 226.
Change in Motricity Index (MI)
The MI aims to evaluate lower limb motor impairment after stroke, administrated on both sides. Items to assess the lower limbs are 3, scoring from 0 to 33 each: (1) ankle dorsiflexion with foot in a plantar flexed position (2) knee extension with the foot unsupported and the knee at 90° (3) hip flexion with the hip at 90° moving the knee as close as possible to the chin. (no movement: 0, palpable flicker but no movement: 9, movement but not against gravity :14, movement against gravity movement against gravity: 19, movement against resistance: 25, normal:33)
Change in Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS)
The MAS is a 6 point ordinal scale used for grading hypertonia in individuals with neurological diagnoses. A score of 0 on the scale indicates no increase in tone while a score of 4 indicates rigidity. Tone is scored by passively moving the individual's limb and assessing the amount of resistance to movement felt by the examiner.
Change in Tinetti Scale Balance (TIN-B)
Scales to measure activity ICF domain.
Change in Tinetti Walking (TIN-W)
Scales to measure activity ICF domain.
Change in Functional Ambulation Classification (FAC)
Functional Ambulation Classification is a functional walking test that evaluates ambulation ability. This 6-point scale assesses ambulation status by determining how much human support the patient requires when walking, regardless of whether or not they use a personal assistive device.
Change in Trunk Control Test (TCT)
The TCT assesses the motor impairment in stroke patients and it's correlated with eventual walking ability. Testing is done with the patient lying on a bed: (1) roll to weak side. (2) roll to strong side. (3) balance in sitting position on the edge of the bed with the feet off the ground for at least 30. (4) sit up from lying down. Total score: 0-100
Change in 10 Meter Walk Test (10MWT)
This test will assess the patient's speed during gait. Patients will be asked to walk at their preferred maximum and safe speed. Patients will be positioned 1 meter before the start line and instructed to walk 10 meters, and pass the end line approximately 1 meter after. The distance before and after the course are meant to minimize the effect of acceleration and deceleration. Time will be measured using a stopwatch and recorded to the one hundredth of a second (ex: 2.15 s). The test will be recorded 3 times, with adequate rests between them. The average of the 3 times should be recorded.
Change in Time Up And Go (TUG)
The Time Up And Go is a test used to assess mobility, balance, and walking in people with balance impairments. The subject must stand up from a chair (which should not be leant against a wall), walk a distance of 3 meters, turn around, walk back to the chair and sit down - all performed as quickly and as safely as possible. Time will be measured using a chronometer.
Change in Walking Handicap Scale (WHS)
The Walking Handicap Scale is a classification of 6 functional walking categories, considered as a participation category of the ICF because of its 3 items referred to community ambulation. The score ranges from 1 to 6, and do higher values represent a better outcome.

Full Information

First Posted
January 10, 2019
Last Updated
June 23, 2023
Sponsor
IRCCS San Raffaele Roma
Collaborators
Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03805009
Brief Title
Efficacy of End-Effector Robot-Assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients
Official Title
Efficacy of End-Effector Robot-Assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients: Clinical and Gait Outcomes
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
June 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
March 19, 2013 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
December 31, 2017 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
September 30, 2018 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
IRCCS San Raffaele Roma
Collaborators
Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
To date, no studies seems to compare conventional gait rehabilitation program with end-effector RAGT in subacute stroke patients by analysing the variations of gait kinematics beyond clinical multi prospective outcomes. The aim of this pilot study is to evaluate the efficacy of end-effector RAGT in subacute stroke patients in terms of clinical outcomes and gait kinematics, comparing them with conventional gait rehabilitation program.
Detailed Description
To evaluate the efficacy of end-effector RAGT in subacute stroke patients in terms of clinical outcomes and gait kinematics, comparing them with conventional gait rehabilitation program, patients following first ever stroke in sub-acute phase will be recruited and assessed both clinically and instrumentally (Gait Analysis) at baseline (T0) and at the end of training program (T1). The patients will be divided into 2 groups and will conduct two different types of gait training: one group will be recruited by IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana of Rome and will perform, in addition to conventional therapy, gait training using an end-effector robotic device for RAGT(Robotic Group, RG); and another group will be recruited by the Don Carlo Gnocchi Foundation Onlus of Rome, and will perform conventional gait rehabilitation program(Conventional Group, CG).

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Severe Stroke, Acute Stroke, Mild Stroke, Central Nervous System Diseases, Cerebrovascular Disease, Brain Diseases, Cardiovascular Diseases, Gait, Hemiplegic
Keywords
Stroke, Robot, Hemiparesis, Gait Training, Rehabilitation, Functional Recovery, Robot-Assisted Gait Training

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
Single blinded, non randomized, pilot study
Masking
Outcomes Assessor
Masking Description
All the clinical assessments are routinely administered by both participating centers, and the outcome assessors are blinded to the study protocols.
Allocation
Non-Randomized
Enrollment
26 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Robotic Group (RG)
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Robotic Group (RG) will perform, in addition to conventional therapy, gait training using an end-effector robotic device for Robot-Assisted Gait Training (RAGT), 3 times/week for 20 sessions. During the training, patients will be asked to walk, at a varying speed, for 45 minutes and a partial Body Weight Support (BWS). Participants will start with 30-40% of BWS and an initial speed of 1.5 km/h; increasing to a maximum of between 2.2 and 2.5 km/h and reducing the initial BWS to 15%. The therapist will provide any help during sessions if required. Over 45 minutes, the patient simulates a minimum of 300 steps; patients could rest during the session, though they will be asked to walk continuously for a minimum of 5 minutes during each session.
Arm Title
Conventional Group (CG)
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
Conventional Group (CG) will perform conventional gait rehabilitation program. The treatment will include: muscle strengthening exercises and stretching of the lower limb, and static and dynamic exercises for the recovery of balance in the supine and standing positions using assistive devices; training gait exercises with parallel bars or in open spaces performed both with and without assistive devices; training to climb up and down stairs; exercises to improve proprioception in the supine, sitting and standing positions, using a proprioceptive footboard; exercises to improve trunk control.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Robot-Assisted Gait Training (RAGT)
Intervention Description
The Robotic Group (RG) performs a Robot-Assisted Gait Training (RAGT) using an end-effector robotic device (G-EO system-Reha Technology-Olten, Switzerland).
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Change in Six-Minute Walking Test (6MWT)
Description
The 6MWT measures the distance a subject covers during an indoor gait on a flat, hard surface in 6 minutes, using assistive devices, as necessary. The test is a reliable and valid evaluation of functional exercise capacity and is used as a sub-maximal test of aerobic capacity and endurance. The minimal detectable change in distance for people with sub-acute stroke is 60.98 meters. The 6MWT is a patient self-paced walk test and assesses the level of functional capacity. Patients are allowed to stop and rest during the test. However, the timer does not stop. If the patient is unable to complete the test, the time is stopped at that moment. The missing time and the reason of the stop are recorded. This test will be administered while wearing a pulse oximeter to monitor heart rate and oxygen saturation, also integrated with Borg scale to assess dyspnea.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Change in Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) scale
Description
The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) is a stroke-specific, performance-based impairment index. It is designed to assess motor functioning, balance, sensation and joint functioning in patients with post-stroke hemiplegia. It is applied clinically and in research to determine disease severity, describe motor recovery, and to plan and assess treatment. The scale is comprised of five domains and there are 155 items in total: Motor functioning (the score ranges from 0 (hemiplegia) to 100 points (normal motor performance). Divided into 66 points for upper extremity and 34 points for the lower extremity. Sensory functioning (from 0 to 24 points) Balance (from 0 to 14) Joint range of motion (from 0 to 44) Joint pain (from 0 to 44 ) Scale items are scored on the basis of ability to complete the item using a 3-point ordinal scale where 0=cannot perform, 1=performs partially and 2=performs fully. The total possible scale score is 226.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in Motricity Index (MI)
Description
The MI aims to evaluate lower limb motor impairment after stroke, administrated on both sides. Items to assess the lower limbs are 3, scoring from 0 to 33 each: (1) ankle dorsiflexion with foot in a plantar flexed position (2) knee extension with the foot unsupported and the knee at 90° (3) hip flexion with the hip at 90° moving the knee as close as possible to the chin. (no movement: 0, palpable flicker but no movement: 9, movement but not against gravity :14, movement against gravity movement against gravity: 19, movement against resistance: 25, normal:33)
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS)
Description
The MAS is a 6 point ordinal scale used for grading hypertonia in individuals with neurological diagnoses. A score of 0 on the scale indicates no increase in tone while a score of 4 indicates rigidity. Tone is scored by passively moving the individual's limb and assessing the amount of resistance to movement felt by the examiner.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in Tinetti Scale Balance (TIN-B)
Description
Scales to measure activity ICF domain.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in Tinetti Walking (TIN-W)
Description
Scales to measure activity ICF domain.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in Functional Ambulation Classification (FAC)
Description
Functional Ambulation Classification is a functional walking test that evaluates ambulation ability. This 6-point scale assesses ambulation status by determining how much human support the patient requires when walking, regardless of whether or not they use a personal assistive device.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in Trunk Control Test (TCT)
Description
The TCT assesses the motor impairment in stroke patients and it's correlated with eventual walking ability. Testing is done with the patient lying on a bed: (1) roll to weak side. (2) roll to strong side. (3) balance in sitting position on the edge of the bed with the feet off the ground for at least 30. (4) sit up from lying down. Total score: 0-100
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in 10 Meter Walk Test (10MWT)
Description
This test will assess the patient's speed during gait. Patients will be asked to walk at their preferred maximum and safe speed. Patients will be positioned 1 meter before the start line and instructed to walk 10 meters, and pass the end line approximately 1 meter after. The distance before and after the course are meant to minimize the effect of acceleration and deceleration. Time will be measured using a stopwatch and recorded to the one hundredth of a second (ex: 2.15 s). The test will be recorded 3 times, with adequate rests between them. The average of the 3 times should be recorded.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in Time Up And Go (TUG)
Description
The Time Up And Go is a test used to assess mobility, balance, and walking in people with balance impairments. The subject must stand up from a chair (which should not be leant against a wall), walk a distance of 3 meters, turn around, walk back to the chair and sit down - all performed as quickly and as safely as possible. Time will be measured using a chronometer.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Change in Walking Handicap Scale (WHS)
Description
The Walking Handicap Scale is a classification of 6 functional walking categories, considered as a participation category of the ICF because of its 3 items referred to community ambulation. The score ranges from 1 to 6, and do higher values represent a better outcome.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures:
Title
Gait Analysis
Description
Kinematic and kinetic gait parameters will be calculated from data acquired with a motion capture system (SMART-DX; BTSBioengneering, Italy).
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)
Title
Postural Analysis
Description
Posturographic parameters will be obtained from the analysis of the center of pressure (COP) trajectories measured by force platforms during standing in both open and closed eyes conditions.
Time Frame
Session 1 (baseline), and Session 20 (week 7)

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
80 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: first cerebral stroke 2 weeks up to 6 months post the acute event (subacute patients) age between 18-80 years ability to fit into the end-effector footplates no significant limitation of joint range of motion ability to tolerate upright standing for 60 seconds ability to walk unassisted or with little assistance ability to give written consent compliance with the study procedures Exclusion Criteria: contractures of the hip, knee, or ankle joints that might limit the range of motion during gait medical issue that precludes full weight bearing and ambulation (e.g. orthopaedic injuries, pain, severe osteoporosis, or severe spasticity) cognitive and/or communicative disability (e.g. due to brain injury): inability to understand the instructions required for the study cardiac pathologies, anxiety or psychosis that might interfere with the use of the equipment or testing Written informed consent was obtained from each subject.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Marco Franceschini, MD
Organizational Affiliation
IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana
Official's Role
Study Chair
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Sanaz Pournajaf, Dr
Organizational Affiliation
IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Michela Goffredo, Ing
Organizational Affiliation
IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana
City
Rome
State/Province
RM
ZIP/Postal Code
00163
Country
Italy
Facility Name
Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus
City
Rome
State/Province
RM
ZIP/Postal Code
00166
Country
Italy

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Undecided
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
17971632
Citation
Palmieri L, Barchielli A, Cesana G, de Campora E, Goldoni CA, Spolaore P, Uguccioni M, Vancheri F, Vanuzzo D, Ciccarelli P, Giampaoli S; Research Group of the Project 'Italian National Register of Coronary and Cerebrovascular Events'. The Italian register of cardiovascular diseases: attack rates and case fatality for cerebrovascular events. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;24(6):530-9. doi: 10.1159/000110423. Epub 2007 Oct 29.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24710969
Citation
Swinnen E, Beckwee D, Meeusen R, Baeyens JP, Kerckhofs E. Does robot-assisted gait rehabilitation improve balance in stroke patients? A systematic review. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2014 Mar-Apr;21(2):87-100. doi: 10.1310/tsr2102-87.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17939776
Citation
Eng JJ, Tang PF. Gait training strategies to optimize walking ability in people with stroke: a synthesis of the evidence. Expert Rev Neurother. 2007 Oct;7(10):1417-36. doi: 10.1586/14737175.7.10.1417.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19608100
Citation
Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol. 2009 Aug;8(8):741-54. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70150-4.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28488268
Citation
Mehrholz J, Thomas S, Werner C, Kugler J, Pohl M, Elsner B. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 May 10;5(5):CD006185. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub4.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Pons, J. L. (2008). Wearable robots: biomechatronic exoskeletons. John Wiley & Sons. 127-164.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20584307
Citation
Hesse S, Waldner A, Tomelleri C. Innovative gait robot for the repetitive practice of floor walking and stair climbing up and down in stroke patients. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010 Jun 28;7:30. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-7-30.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22378603
Citation
Mehrholz J, Pohl M. Electromechanical-assisted gait training after stroke: a systematic review comparing end-effector and exoskeleton devices. J Rehabil Med. 2012 Mar;44(3):193-9. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0943.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22992166
Citation
Kelley CP, Childress J, Boake C, Noser EA. Over-ground and robotic-assisted locomotor training in adults with chronic stroke: a blinded randomized clinical trial. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2013 Mar;8(2):161-8. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2012.714052. Epub 2012 Sep 20.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26644642
Citation
Cho DY, Park SW, Lee MJ, Park DS, Kim EJ. Effects of robot-assisted gait training on the balance and gait of chronic stroke patients: focus on dependent ambulators. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Oct;27(10):3053-7. doi: 10.1589/jpts.27.3053. Epub 2015 Oct 30.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26406020
Citation
Li L, Ding L, Chen N, Mao Y, Huang D, Li L. Improved walking ability with wearable robot-assisted training in patients suffering chronic stroke. Biomed Mater Eng. 2015;26 Suppl 1:S329-40. doi: 10.3233/BME-151320.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24162795
Citation
Bonnyaud C, Pradon D, Boudarham J, Robertson J, Vuillerme N, Roche N. Effects of gait training using a robotic constraint (Lokomat(R)) on gait kinematics and kinetics in chronic stroke patients. J Rehabil Med. 2014 Feb;46(2):132-8. doi: 10.2340/16501977-1248.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
27037035
Citation
Lonini L, Shawen N, Scanlan K, Rymer WZ, Kording KP, Jayaraman A. Accelerometry-enabled measurement of walking performance with a robotic exoskeleton: a pilot study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 Mar 31;13:35. doi: 10.1186/s12984-016-0142-9.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24904361
Citation
Gandolfi M, Geroin C, Picelli A, Munari D, Waldner A, Tamburin S, Marchioretto F, Smania N. Robot-assisted vs. sensory integration training in treating gait and balance dysfunctions in patients with multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 May 22;8:318. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00318. eCollection 2014.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26818847
Citation
Sale P, Russo EF, Russo M, Masiero S, Piccione F, Calabro RS, Filoni S. Effects on mobility training and de-adaptations in subjects with Spinal Cord Injury due to a Wearable Robot: a preliminary report. BMC Neurol. 2016 Jan 28;16:12. doi: 10.1186/s12883-016-0536-0.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25467393
Citation
Dundar U, Toktas H, Solak O, Ulasli AM, Eroglu S. A comparative study of conventional physiotherapy versus robotic training combined with physiotherapy in patients with stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2014 Nov-Dec;21(6):453-61. doi: 10.1310/tsr2106-453.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
18467648
Citation
Hornby TG, Campbell DD, Kahn JH, Demott T, Moore JL, Roth HR. Enhanced gait-related improvements after therapist- versus robotic-assisted locomotor training in subjects with chronic stroke: a randomized controlled study. Stroke. 2008 Jun;39(6):1786-92. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.504779. Epub 2008 May 8. Erratum In: Stroke.2008 Aug;39(8): e143.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28946585
Citation
Aprile I, Iacovelli C, Padua L, Galafate D, Criscuolo S, Gabbani D, Cruciani A, Germanotta M, Di Sipio E, De Pisi F, Franceschini M. Efficacy of Robotic-Assisted Gait Training in chronic stroke patients: Preliminary results of an Italian bi-centre study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2017;41(4):775-782. doi: 10.3233/NRE-172156.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26512928
Citation
Taveggia G, Borboni A, Mule C, Villafane JH, Negrini S. Conflicting results of robot-assisted versus usual gait training during postacute rehabilitation of stroke patients: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Rehabil Res. 2016 Mar;39(1):29-35. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000137.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26649295
Citation
Mao YR, Lo WL, Lin Q, Li L, Xiao X, Raghavan P, Huang DF. The Effect of Body Weight Support Treadmill Training on Gait Recovery, Proximal Lower Limb Motor Pattern, and Balance in Patients with Subacute Stroke. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:175719. doi: 10.1155/2015/175719. Epub 2015 Nov 16.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Davis RB, Ounpuu S, Tyburski D, Gage JR. A gait analysis data collection and reduction technique. Hum MovSci 1991; 10: 575-587.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Winter DA. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15947263
Citation
Nichols-Larsen DS, Clark PC, Zeringue A, Greenspan A, Blanton S. Factors influencing stroke survivors' quality of life during subacute recovery. Stroke. 2005 Jul;36(7):1480-4. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000170706.13595.4f. Epub 2005 Jun 9.
Results Reference
background

Learn more about this trial

Efficacy of End-Effector Robot-Assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs