RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The results of existing lower extremity robotics studies are conflicting, and few relevant clinical trials have examined short-term efficacy. In addition, most of the outcome indicators in existing studies are scales, which are not objective enough. We used the combination of objective instrument measurement and scale to explore the short-term efficacy of the lower limb A3 robot, to provide a clinical reference. AIM: To investigate the improvement of lower limb walking ability and balance in stroke treated by A3 lower limb robot. METHODS: Sixty stroke patients were recruited prospectively in a hospital and randomized into the A3 group and the control group. They received 30 min of A3 robotics training and 30 min of floor walking training in addition to 30 min of regular rehabilitation training. The training was performed five times a week, once a day, for 2 wk. The t-test or non-parametric test was used to compare the three-dimensional gait parameters and balance between the two groups before and after treatment. RESULTS: The scores of basic activities of daily living, Stroke-Specific Quality of Life Scale, FM balance meter, Fugl-Meyer Assessment scores, Rivermead Mobility Index, Stride speed, Stride length, and Time Up and Go test in the two groups were significantly better than before treatment (19.29 ± 12.15 vs 3.52 ± 4.34; 22.57 ± 17.99 vs 4.07 ± 2.51; 1.21 ± 0.83 vs 0.18 ± 0.40; 3.50 ± 3.80 vs 0.96 ± 2.08; 2.07 ± 1.21 vs 0.41 ± 0.57; 0.89 ± 0.63 vs 0.11 ± 0.32; 12.38 ± 9.00 vs 2.80 ± 3.43; 18.84 ± 11.24 vs 3.80 ± 10.83; 45.12 ± 69.41 vs 8.41 ± 10.20; 29.45 ± 16.62 vs 8.68 ± 10.74; P < 0.05). All outcome indicators were significantly better in the A3 group than in the control group, except the area of the balance parameter. CONCLUSION: For the short-term treatment of patients with subacute stroke, the addition of A3 robotic walking training to conventional physiotherapy appears to be more effective than the addition of ground-based walking training.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The cerebellum is a key structure involved in balance and motor control, and has become a new stimulation target in brain regulation technology. Interference theta-burst simulation (iTBS) is a novel simulation mode of repetitive transcranial magnetic simulation. However, the impact of cerebellar iTBS on balance function and gait in stroke patients is still unknown. AIM: The aim of this study was to determine whether cerebellar iTBS can improve function, particularly balance and gait, in patients with post-stroke hemiplegia. DESIGN: This study is a randomized, double-blind, sham controlled clinical trial. SETTING: The study was carried out at the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine in a general hospital. POPULATION: Patients with stroke with first unilateral lesions were enrolled in the study. METHODS: Thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to the cerebellar iTBS group or sham stimulation group. The cerebellar iTBS or pseudo stimulation site is the ipsilateral cerebellum on the paralyzed side, which is completed just before daily physical therapy. The study was conducted five times a week for two consecutive weeks. All patients were assessed before the intervention (T0) and at the end of 2 weeks of treatment (T1), respectively. The primary outcome was the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), while secondary outcome measures included the Fugl Meyer Lower Limb Assessment Scale (FMA-LE), timed up and go (TUG), Barthel Index (BI), and gait analysis. RESULTS: After 2 weeks of intervention, the BBS, FMA-LE, TUG, and BI score in both the iTBS group and the sham group were significantly improved compared to the baseline (all P<0.05). Also, there was a significant gait parameter improvement including the cadence, stride length, velocity, step length compared to the baseline (P<0.05) in the iTBS group, but only significant improvement in cadence was identified in the sham group (P<0.05). Intergroup comparison showed that the BBS (P<0.001), FMA-LE (P<0.001), and BI (P=0.002) in the iTBS group were significantly higher than those in the sham group, and the TUG in the iTBS was significantly lower than that in the sham group (P=0.002). In addition, there were significant differences in cadence (P=0.029), strip length (P=0.046), gain velocity (P=0.002), and step length of affected lower limb (P=0.024) between the iTBS group and the sham iTBS group. CONCLUSIONS: Physical therapy is able to improve the functional recovery in hemiplegic patients after stroke, but the cerebellar iTBS can facilitate and accelerate the recovery, particularly the balance function and gait. Cerebellar iTBS could be an efficient and facilitative treatment for patients with stroke. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Cerebellar iTBS provides a convenient and efficient treatment modality for functional recovery of patients with stroke, especially balance function and gait.