RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although stroke survivors can benefit from robotic gait rehabilitation, stationary robot-assisted gait training needs further investigation. In this paper, we investigated the efficacy of this approach (with an exoskeleton or an end-effector robot) in comparison to the conventional overground gait training in subacute stroke survivors. METHODS: In a multicenter controlled clinical trial, 89 subacute stroke survivors conducted twenty sessions of robot-assisted gait training (Robotic Group) or overground gait training (Control Group) in addition to the standard daily therapy. The robotic training was performed with an exoskeleton (RobotEXO-group) or an end-effector (RobotEND-group). Clinical outcomes were assessed before (T0) and after (T1) the treatment. The walking speed during the 10-Meter Walk Test (10 MWT) was the primary outcome of this study, and secondary outcomes were the 6-Minute Walk Test (6 MWT), Timed Up and Go test (TUG), and the modified Barthel Index (mBI). RESULTS: The main characteristics assessed in the Robotic and Control groups did not differ at baseline. A significant benefit was detected from the 10 MWT in the Robotic Group at the end of the study period (primary endpoint). A benefit was also observed from the following parameters: 6 MWT, TUG, and mBI. Moreover, patients belonging to the Robot Group outperformed the Control Group in gait speed, endurance, balance, and ADL. The RobotEND-group improved their walking speed more than the RobotEXO-group. CONCLUSION: The stationary robot-assisted training improved walking ability better than the conventional training in subacute stroke survivors. These results suggest that people with subacute stroke may benefit from Robot-Assisted training in potentiating gait speed and endurance. Our results also support that end-effector robots would be superior to exoskeleton robots for improving gait speed enhancement.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The loss of arm function is a common and disabling outcome after stroke. Robot-assisted upper limb (UL) training may improve outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore the effect of robot-assisted training using end-effector and exoskeleton robots on UL function following a stroke in real-life clinical practice. METHODS: A total of 105 patients affected by a first-ever supratentorial stroke were enrolled in 18 neurorehabilitation centers and treated with electromechanically assisted arm training as an add-on to conventional therapy. Both interventions provided either an exoskeleton or an end-effector device (as per clinical practice) and consisted of 20 sessions (3/5 times per week; 6-8 weeks). Patients were assessed by validated UL scales at baseline (T0), post-treatment (T1), and at three-month follow-up (T2). The primary outcome was the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the upper extremity (FMA-UE). RESULTS: FMA-UE improved at T1 by 6 points on average in the end-effector group and 11 points on average in the exoskeleton group (p < 0.0001). Exoskeletons were more effective in the subacute phase, whereas the end-effectors were more effective in the chronic phase (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: robot-assisted training might help improve UL function in stroke patients as an add-on treatment in both subacute and chronic stages. Pragmatic and highmethodological studies are needed to confirm the showed effectiveness of the exoskeleton and end-effector devices.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Until now studies report inconclusive results as regards the effectiveness of exclusive use of robot-assisted training and clinical indications in stroke patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if the only robot-assisted end-effector-based gait training can be feasible in chronic stroke subjects in terms of gait recovery. METHODS: Five rehabilitation centers participated and one hundred chronic post-stroke patients were recruited. Patients underwent a robot-assisted end-effector-based gait training as only rehabilitation treatment.6 Minute Walk Test, 10 Meter Walk Test, Timed Up and Go test, Modified Ashworth Scale, Motricity Index, Functional Ambulation Classification (FAC) and Walking Handicap Scale were used as outcome clinical measure. Patients were divided into two groups: those assessed as FAC <3 (Group 1) and as FAC ≥ 3 (Group 2). RESULTS: Statistically significant changes were observed in each clinical outcome measure. Significant changes were observed in Group 1 and in Group 2. Significant percentages of patients achieved Minimally Clinically Important Difference in 6 Minute Walk Test in Group 2 and Timed Up and Go test in Group 1. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic stroke patients exposed to only robot-assisted end-effector-based gait training showed significant improvements in global motor performances, gait endurance, balance and coordination, lower limbs strength and even spasticity.