INTRODUCTION: Robots help to intensify motor rehabilitation of the upper and lower limbs after stroke. This article presents controlled studies relating to this topic, and an overview. METHODS: A search was carried out for relevant randomized controlled trials, published between 1980 and 2007, on Medline (PubMed), Embase, and CINHAL. RESULTS: Two studies showed benefit for an electromechanical gait trainer, with significantly more patients resuming walking as compared to conventional physiotherapy. Two studies showed no evidence of benefit for an exoskeleton-based system. A pooled analysis was not conducted due to the small numbers of studies and high heterogeneity. In arm/hand rehabilitation a number of unilateral or bilateral end-effector based systems proved effective in patients with stroke, and a simple one-dimensional system and a passive exoskeleton system proved effective in patients with chronic symptoms. DISCUSSION: Robot-assisted motor rehabilitation after stroke appears promising. More trials, including comparative studies, are mandatory. The robot cannot be considered a substitute for the patient-therapist relationship.
INTRODUCTION: Robots help to intensify motor rehabilitation of the upper and lower limbs after stroke. This article presents controlled studies relating to this topic, and an overview. METHODS: A search was carried out for relevant randomized controlled trials, published between 1980 and 2007, on Medline (PubMed), Embase, and CINHAL. RESULTS: Two studies showed benefit for an electromechanical gait trainer, with significantly more patients resuming walking as compared to conventional physiotherapy. Two studies showed no evidence of benefit for an exoskeleton-based system. A pooled analysis was not conducted due to the small numbers of studies and high heterogeneity. In arm/hand rehabilitation a number of unilateral or bilateral end-effector based systems proved effective in patients with stroke, and a simple one-dimensional system and a passive exoskeleton system proved effective in patients with chronic symptoms. DISCUSSION: Robot-assisted motor rehabilitation after stroke appears promising. More trials, including comparative studies, are mandatory. The robot cannot be considered a substitute for the patient-therapist relationship.
Authors: M Pohl; C Werner; M Holzgraefe; G Kroczek; J Mehrholz; I Wingendorf; G Hoölig; R Koch; S Hesse Journal: Clin Rehabil Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.477
Authors: Steven L Wolf; Carolee J Winstein; J Philip Miller; Edward Taub; Gitendra Uswatte; David Morris; Carol Giuliani; Kathye E Light; Deborah Nichols-Larsen Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Andreas Mayr; Markus Kofler; Ellen Quirbach; Heinz Matzak; Katrin Fröhlich; Leopold Saltuari Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2007-05-02 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Peter S Lum; Charles G Burgar; Peggy C Shor; Matra Majmundar; Machiel Van der Loos Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Ji-Eun Cho; Jun Sang Yoo; Kyoung Eun Kim; Sung Tae Cho; Woo Seok Jang; Ki Hun Cho; Wan-Hee Lee Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-02-06 Impact factor: 3.411