Benefits of robotic-assisted gait in spinal cord injury: a systematic review

Authors

  • Francine Bertolais do Valle Souza Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina
  • Pedro Cláudio Gonsales de Castro Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina
  • Denise Vianna Machado Ayres Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina
  • Maria Cecilia dos Santos Moreira Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina
  • Linamara Rizzo Battistella Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5275-0733

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5935/0104-7795.20130023

Keywords:

Spinal Cord Injuries, Robotics, Gait, Rehabilitation

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the quality of current evidence regarding effectiveness of body weightsupported, robot-assisted gait in subjects with spinal cord injury, with emphasis on gait performance. Method: A survey was conducted in PubMed, LILACS and EMBASE using the keywords “spinal cord injury” AND (gait OR walking OR deambulation) reahbilitation AND robotic AND (Lokomat OR ReoAmbulator OR Formador Gait). Clinical trials published between 2001-2012 which compared locomotor training with or without other intervention were included. Results: From the 8 selected studies, only one did not findimprovement in gait performance. From the studies which found improvement, 6 found statistically significant improvement and one found no significant difference, although a tendency to improvement was noticed. The findings of these studies were obtained through assessment tools like the six-minute and the ten-meter walk tests, FIM (Functional Independence Measure, WISCI II (Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury), among others. Some studies pointed to a decrease in the need for orthotics and assistive devices in this group. Regarding methodological quality, 6 articles presented scores lower than 3 points and only one article got the maximum score 5 in JADAD scale (low quality less than 3). Implication/Impact on rehabilitation. Conclusion: In spite of the small quantity of articles found, of the low methodological quality noted and the fact that this is a costly and new modality of intervention, the results are significant when compared to conventional physical therapy and to other well-established techniques in physical therapy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Houldin A, Luttin K, Lam T. Locomotor adaptations and aftereffects to resistance during walking in individuals with spinal cord injury. J Neurophysiol. 2011;106(1):247-58. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00753.2010

Alcobendas-Maestro M, Esclarín-Ruz A, Casado-López RM, Muñoz-González A, Pérez-Mateos G, González-Valdizán E, et al. Lokomat robotic-assisted versus overground training within 3 to 6 months of incomplete spinal cord lesion: randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012;26(9):1058-63. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1545968312448232

Mehrholz J, Kugler J, Pohl M. Locomotor training for walking after spinal cord injury. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33(21):E768-77. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181849747

Swinnen E, Duerinck S, Baeyens JP, Meeusen R, Kerckhofs E. Effectiveness of robot-assisted gait training in persons with spinal cord injury: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med. 2010;42(6):520-6.

Duschau-Wicke A, Caprez A, Riener R. Patient-cooperative control increases active participation of individuals with SCI during robot-aided gait training. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010;7:43. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-7-43

Hidler JM, Wall AE. Alterations in muscle activation patterns during robotic-assisted walking. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2005;20(2):184-93. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.09.016

Schmidt H, Werner C, Bernhardt R, Hesse S, Krüger J. Gait rehabilitation machines based on programmable footplates. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2007;4:2. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-4-2

Field-Fote EC, Lindley SD, Sherman AL. Locomotor training approaches for individuals with spinal cord injury: a preliminary report of walking-related outcomes. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2005;29(3):127-37. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.NPT.0000282245.31158.09

Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17(1):1-12. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4

Field-Fote EC, Roach KE. Influence of a locomotor training approach on walking speed and distance in people with chronic spinal cord injury: a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther. 2011;91(1):48-60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20090359

Galen SS, Clarke CJ, Allan DB, Conway BA. A portable gait assessment tool to record temporal gait parameters in SCI. Med Eng Phys. 2011;33(5):626-32. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2011.01.003

Schwartz I, Sajina A, Neeb M, Fisher I, Katz-Luerer M, Meiner Z. Locomotor training using a robotic device in patients with subacute spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2011;49(10):1062-7. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sc.2011.59

Jezernik S, Schärer R, Colombo G, Morari M. Adaptive robotic rehabilitation of locomotion: a clinical study in spinally injured individuals. Spinal Cord. 2003;41(12):657-66. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.sc.3101518

Dittuno PL, Ditunno JF Jr. Walking index for spinal cord injury (WISCI II): scale revision. Spinal Cord. 2001;39(12):654-6. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.sc.3101223

Published

2013-09-09

Issue

Section

Review Article

How to Cite

1.
Souza FB do V, Castro PCG de, Ayres DVM, Moreira MC dos S, Battistella LR. Benefits of robotic-assisted gait in spinal cord injury: a systematic review. Acta Fisiátr. [Internet]. 2013 Sep. 9 [cited 2024 May 19];20(3):142-6. Available from: https://www.revistas.usp.br/actafisiatrica/article/view/103783