Abnormal synergistic gait mitigation in acute stroke using an innovative ankle-knee-hip interlimb humanoid robot: a preliminary randomized controlled trial.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Ankle Joint
/ physiopathology
Biomechanical Phenomena
Equipment Design
Exoskeleton Device
Female
Functional Status
Gait
Gait Disorders, Neurologic
/ diagnosis
Hip Joint
/ physiopathology
Humans
Knee Joint
/ physiopathology
Male
Middle Aged
Physical Therapy Modalities
Range of Motion, Articular
Recovery of Function
Robotics
/ instrumentation
Single-Blind Method
Stroke
/ diagnosis
Stroke Rehabilitation
/ instrumentation
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 11 2021
24 11 2021
Historique:
received:
14
04
2021
accepted:
03
11
2021
entrez:
25
11
2021
pubmed:
26
11
2021
medline:
3
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Abnormal spasticity and associated synergistic patterns are the most common neuromuscular impairments affecting ankle-knee-hip interlimb coordinated gait kinematics and kinetics in patients with hemiparetic stroke. Although patients with hemiparetic stroke undergo various treatments to improve gait and movement, it remains unknown how spasticity and associated synergistic patterns change after robot-assisted and conventional treatment. We developed an innovative ankle-knee-hip interlimb coordinated humanoid robot (ICT) to mitigate abnormal spasticity and synergistic patterns. The objective of the preliminary clinical trial was to compare the effects of ICT combined with conventional physical therapy (ICT-C) and conventional physical therapy and gait training (CPT-G) on abnormal spasticity and synergistic gait patterns in 20 patients with acute hemiparesis. We performed secondary analyses aimed at elucidating the biomechanical effects of Walkbot ICT on kinematic (spatiotemporal parameters and angles) and kinetic (active force, resistive force, and stiffness) gait parameters before and after ICT in the ICT-C group. The intervention for this group comprised 60-min conventional physical therapy plus 30-min robot-assisted training, 7 days/week, for 2 weeks. Significant biomechanical effects in knee joint kinematics; hip, knee, and ankle active forces; hip, knee, and ankle resistive forces; and hip, knee, and ankle stiffness were associated with ICT-C. Our novel findings provide promising evidence for conventional therapy supplemented by robot-assisted therapy for abnormal spasticity, synergistic, and altered biomechanical gait impairments in patients in the acute post-stroke recovery phase.Trial Registration: Clinical Trials.gov identifier NCT03554642 (14/01/2020).
Identifiants
pubmed: 34819515
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01959-z
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-01959-z
pmc: PMC8613200
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03554642']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
22823Subventions
Organisme : Brain Korea 21 PLUS Project
ID : 2019-51-0018
Organisme : Korea Institute for Robot Industry Advancement Project
ID : ROBOT16-A003
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Neurol Sci. 2016 Apr;37(4):503-14
pubmed: 26781943
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2004 May;41(3A):293-312
pubmed: 15543447
Stroke. 1999 Mar;30(3):580-5
pubmed: 10066855
Gait Posture. 2004 Oct;20(2):140-6
pubmed: 15336283
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012 Nov-Dec;26(9):1058-63
pubmed: 22699827
J Neurosci. 2013 Nov 6;33(45):17691-709
pubmed: 24198362
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2007 Jan 23;4:1
pubmed: 17244363
NeuroRehabilitation. 2020;46(4):577-587
pubmed: 32538882
Neuron. 2006 Dec 7;52(5):751-66
pubmed: 17145498
Stroke. 2005 Jun;36(6):1166-71
pubmed: 15890990
Front Neurol. 2013 Nov 13;4:184
pubmed: 24312073
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48(1):83-8
pubmed: 21328165
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 Jan 28;13:4
pubmed: 26817449
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010 Sep 10;7:43
pubmed: 20828422
IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2015 Jul;23(4):636-42
pubmed: 25850089
J Rehabil Med. 2012 Mar;44(3):193-9
pubmed: 22378603
Sci Transl Med. 2017 Aug 23;9(404):
pubmed: 28835518
J Neurophysiol. 2010 Mar;103(3):1557-68
pubmed: 20089823
Front Physiol. 2020 Jan 31;10:1575
pubmed: 32076411
Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 27;10(1):12461
pubmed: 32719420
Exp Brain Res. 2014 Jan;232(1):31-42
pubmed: 24212255
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2019 Nov;14(8):826-838
pubmed: 29741134
NeuroRehabilitation. 2018;42(2):181-190
pubmed: 29562554
NeuroRehabilitation. 2021;48(4):493-503
pubmed: 33814476
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018 Jun 5;15(1):46
pubmed: 29866106
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2019 Mar;16(3):187-195
pubmed: 30677307
J Neurophysiol. 2011 Jul;106(1):280-90
pubmed: 21562197
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017 Apr 20;14(1):32
pubmed: 28427422
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2017 May 15;13:1303-1311
pubmed: 28553117
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2019 Jan;98(1):58-64
pubmed: 30142092
PM R. 2014 Jul;6(7):635-42
pubmed: 24451335
Phys Ther. 1966 Apr;46(4):357-75
pubmed: 5907254
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48(4):473-81
pubmed: 21674395
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012 Mar 30;9:18
pubmed: 22463378
J Clin Neurosci. 2017 May;39:16-27
pubmed: 28262404
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999 Sep;80(9):1013-6
pubmed: 10489001
PM R. 2018 Sep;10(9 Suppl 2):S174-S188
pubmed: 30269804
Neurosci Lett. 2017 Jan 10;637:114-119
pubmed: 27884739
Front Physiol. 2018 Aug 02;9:1021
pubmed: 30127749
Phys Ther. 2003 Jan;83(1):49-57
pubmed: 12495412
J Biomech. 2017 Oct 3;63:98-103
pubmed: 28882330
Prog Brain Res. 2008;171:353-62
pubmed: 18718326
Stroke. 2011 Feb;42(2):427-32
pubmed: 21164120
PLoS One. 2013 Jun 17;8(6):e66421
pubmed: 23799100
J Rehabil Res Dev. 1995 Feb;32(1):25-31
pubmed: 7760264
Brain Sci. 2020 Oct 30;10(11):
pubmed: 33143214
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2009 Sep-Oct;16(5):346-56
pubmed: 19903653
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 16;9(10):e110140
pubmed: 25329317
Brain Sci. 2021 Jan 14;11(1):
pubmed: 33466749