Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Jul 29;16(1):99.
doi: 10.1186/s12984-019-0553-5.

Robot-assisted gait training for balance and lower extremity function in patients with infratentorial stroke: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Robot-assisted gait training for balance and lower extremity function in patients with infratentorial stroke: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial

Ha Yeon Kim et al. J Neuroeng Rehabil. .

Abstract

Background: Balance impairments are common in patients with infratentorial stroke. Although robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) exerts positive effects on balance among patients with stroke, it remains unclear whether such training is superior to conventional physical therapy (CPT). Therefore, we aimed to investigate the effects of RAGT combined with CPT and compared them with the effects of CPT only on balance and lower extremity function among survivors of infratentorial stroke.

Methods: This study was a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial with a crossover design conducted at a single rehabilitation hospital. Patients (n = 19; 16 men, three women; mean age: 47.4 ± 11.6 years) with infratentorial stroke were randomly allocated to either group A (4 weeks of RAGT+CPT, followed by 4 weeks of CPT+CPT) or group B (4 weeks of CPT+CPT followed by 4 weeks of RAGT+CPT). Changes in dynamic and static balance as indicated by Berg Balance Scale scores were regarded as the primary outcome measure. Outcome measures were evaluated for each participant at baseline and after each 4-week intervention period.

Results: No significant differences in outcome-related variables were observed between group A and B at baseline. In addition, no significant time-by-group interactions were observed for any variables, indicating that intervention order had no effect on lower extremity function or balance. Significantly greater improvements in secondary functional outcomes such as lower extremity Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA-LE) and scale for the assessment and rating of ataxia (SARA) were observed following the RAGT+CPT intervention than following the CPT+CPT intervention.

Conclusion: RAGT produces clinically significant improvements in balance and lower extremity function in individuals with infratentorial stroke. Thus, RAGT may be useful for patients with balance impairments secondary to other pathologies.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02680691. Registered 09 February 2016; retrospectively registered.

Keywords: Balance; Gait impairment; Robot-assisted gait training; Stroke.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Left: BBS scores between RAGT+CPT and CPT+CPT groups before and after intervention. Right: Four weeks BBS score change from baseline. The error bars means standard errors. BBS: Berg Balance Scale; CPT: conventional physical therapy; RAGT: robot-assisted gait training
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Left: COP-based variables during FSEO, FSEC, FTEO, and FTEC in the RAGT+CPT and CPT+CPT groups. Right: Four weeks COP-based variables change from baseline during FSEO, FSEC, FTEO, and FTEC. (A) COP VelML, (B) COP VelAP, and (C) COP area. The error bars mean standard errors. COP: center of pressure; CPT: conventional physical therapy; FSEC: feet separated, eyes closed; FSEO: feet separated, eyes open; FTEC: feet together, eyes closed; FTEO: feet together, eyes open; RAGT: robot-assisted gait training; VelAP: velocity in the anteroposterior direction; VelML: velocity in the mediolateral direction

References

    1. Harris JE, Eng JJ, Marigold DS, Tokuno CD, Louis CS. Relationship of balance and mobility to fall incidence in people with chronic stroke. Phys Ther. 2005;85:150–158. - PubMed
    1. Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R, Bates B, Cherney LR, Cramer SC, et al. Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery. Stroke. 2016;47:e98–e169. doi: 10.1161/STR.0000000000000098. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Diringer MN. Intracerebral hemorrhage: pathophysiology and management. Crit Care Med. 1993;21:1591–1603. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199310000-00032. - DOI - PubMed
    1. van den Bos GA, Smits JP, Westert GP, van Straten A. Socioeconomic variations in the course of stroke: unequal health outcomes, equal care? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56:943–948. doi: 10.1136/jech.56.12.943. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Emsley HC. Posterior circulation stroke: still a Cinderella disease. BMJ. 2013;346:f3552. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f3552. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data