The dose of robot-assisted gait therapy may influence functional recovery in a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program: an exploratory retrospective study.
Journal
International journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation
ISSN: 1473-5660
Titre abrégé: Int J Rehabil Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7805421
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Jun 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
30
3
2020
medline:
12
11
2020
entrez:
30
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) has been introduced in clinical practice to increase training intensity in patients with neurological disorders. In this observational study, we investigated the effect of the number of RAGT sessions on functional recovery in a heterogeneous cohort of patients. We included patients with a diagnosis of gait impairment due to a neurological disease. A set of demographic, clinical, functional and training parameters was collected for each participant. Each patient received RAGT with an exoskeleton (Lokomat; Hocoma, Volketswil, Switzerland) as part of a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program. We stratified the patients as good responders and poor responders and investigated the effect of varying the number of RAGT sessions with a series of logistic regression models. A total of 143 patients were included in this analysis (good responders = 65, poor responders = 78). Good responder patients spent more days in the hospital (P < 0.01) and underwent a higher number of RAGT sessions (P = 0.04) compared to poor responder patients. Logistic regression models estimated that adding six RAGT sessions mildly increased (by approximately 4%) the probability of a patient becoming a good responder. The rehabilitation phase (subacute/chronic) appeared to be the main determinant of the probability of being a good responder, and stroke patients appeared to be more sensitive to changes in the number of RAGT sessions. Our results seem to confirm previous observations that robotic therapy increases the intensity of rehabilitation, possibly leading to a greater functional recovery in subacute patients with greater impairment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32221149
doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000407
pii: 00004356-202006000-00012
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
175-182Références
Ashley JG, Ashley MJ, Masel BE, Randle K, Kreber LA, Singh C, et al. The influence of post-acute rehabilitation length of stay on traumatic brain injury outcome: a retrospective exploratory study. Brain Inj. 2018; 32:600–607
Beninato M, Gill-Body KM, Salles S, Stark PC, Black-Schaffer RM, Stein J. Determination of the minimal clinically important difference in the FIM instrument in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006; 87:32–39
Chiavaroli F, Derraik JG, Zani G, Lavezzi S, Chiavaroli V, Sherwin E, Basaglia N. Epidemiology and clinical outcomes in a multicentre regional cohort of patients with severe acquired brain injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2016; 38:2038–2046
Chisari C, Bertolucci F, Monaco V, Venturi M, Simonella C, Micera S, Rossi B. Robot-assisted gait training improves motor performances and modifies motor unit firing in poststroke patients. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2015; 51:59–69
Conesa L, Costa Ú, Morales E, Edwards DJ, Cortes M, León D, et al. An observational report of intensive robotic and manual gait training in sub-acute stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012; 9:13
Dierick F, Dehas M, Isambert JL, Injeyan S, Bouché AF, Bleyenheuft Y, Portnoy S. Hemorrhagic versus ischemic stroke: who can best benefit from blended conventional physiotherapy with robotic-assisted gait therapy?. PLoS One. 2017; 12:e0178636
Edwards MJ, McNeil JE, Greenwood RJ. Process and outcome during early inpatient rehabilitation after brain injury. Disabil Rehabil. 2003; 25:405–410
Esquenazi A, Lee S, Wikoff A, Packel A, Toczylowski T, Feeley J. A comparison of locomotor therapy interventions: partial-body weight-supported treadmill, Lokomat, and G-EO training in people with traumatic brain injury. PM R. 2017; 9:839–846
Hamilton BB, Laughlin JA, Fiedler RC, Granger CV. Interrater reliability of the 7-level functional independence measure (FIM). Scand J Rehabil Med. 1994; 26:115–119
Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil. 1987; 1:6–18
Königs M, Beurskens EA, Snoep L, Scherder EJ, Oosterlaan J. Effects of timing and intensity of neurorehabilitation on functional outcome after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018; 99:1149–1159.e1
Lexell J, Brogårdh C. The use of ICF in the neurorehabilitation process. Neurorehabilitation. 2015; 36:5–9
McLafferty FS, Barmparas G, Ortega A, Roberts P, Ko A, Harada M, et al. Predictors of improved functional outcome following inpatient rehabilitation for patients with traumatic brain injury. Neurorehabilitation. 2016; 39:423–430
Mehrholz J, Thomas S, Werner C, Kugler J, Pohl M, Elsner B. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke: a major update of the evidence. Stroke. 2017; 48:e188–e189
Morone G, Bragoni M, Iosa M, De Angelis D, Venturiero V, Coiro P, et al. Who may benefit from robotic-assisted gait training? A randomized clinical trial in patients with subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011; 25:636–644
Morone G, Masiero S, Coiro P, De Angelis D, Venturiero V, Paolucci S, Iosa M. Clinical features of patients who might benefit more from walking robotic training. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2018; 36:293–299
Nam KY, Kim HJ, Kwon BS, Park JW, Lee HJ, Yoo A. Robot-assisted gait training (Lokomat) improves walking function and activity in people with spinal cord injury: a systematic review. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017; 14:24
Schwartz I, Meiner Z. Robotic-assisted gait training in neurological patients: who may benefit?. Ann Biomed Eng. 2015; 43:1260–1269
Shiel A, Burn JP, Henry D, Clark J, Wilson BA, Burnett ME, McLellan D L. The effects of increased rehabilitation therapy after brain injury: results of a prospective controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2001; 15:501–514
Stabel HH, Pedersen AR, Johnsen SP, Nielsen JF. Functional independence: a comparison of the changes during neurorehabilitation between patients with nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage and patients with intracerebral hemorrhage or acute ischemic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017; 98:759–765
Straudi S, Fanciullacci C, Martinuzzi C, Pavarelli C, Rossi B, Chisari C, Basaglia N. The effects of robot-assisted gait training in progressive multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. Mult Scler. 2016; 22:373–384
van der Putten JJ, Hobart JC, Freeman JA, Thompson AJ. Measuring change in disability after inpatient rehabilitation: comparison of the responsiveness of the Barthel index and the functional independence measure. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1999; 66:480–484
Veerbeek JM, Koolstra M, Ket JC, van Wegen EE, Kwakkel G. Effects of augmented exercise therapy on outcome of gait and gait-related activities in the first 6 months after stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke. 2011; 42:3311–3315
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61:344–349
Whiteneck G, Gassaway J, Dijkers M, Backus D, Charlifue S, Chen D, et al. The SCIRehab project: treatment time spent in SCI rehabilitation. Inpatient treatment time across disciplines in spinal cord injury rehabilitation. J Spinal Cord Med. 2011; 34:133–148
Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R, Bates B, Cherney LR, Cramer SC, et al.; American Heart Association Stroke Council, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research. Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2016; 47:e98–e169