Ajax Yang1,2, Pierre Asselin1, Steven Knezevic1, Stephen Kornfeld1,2, Ann M Spungen1,2,3. 1. VA Rehabilitation Research & Development National Center of Excellence for the Medical Consequences of Spinal Cord Injury, James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York. 2. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. 3. Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) often use a wheelchair for mobility due to paralysis. Powered exoskeletal-assisted walking (EAW) provides a modality for walking overground with crutches. Little is known about the EAW velocities and level of assistance (LOA) needed for these devices. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim was to evaluate EAW velocity, number of sessions, and LOA and the relationships among them. The secondary aims were to report on safety and the qualitative analysis of gait and posture during EAW in a hospital setting. METHODS: Twelve individuals with SCI ≥ 1.5 years who were wheelchair users participated. They wore a powered exoskeleton (ReWalk; ReWalk Robotics, Inc., Marlborough, MA) with Lofstrand crutches to complete 10-meter (10 MWT) and 6-minute (6MWT) walk tests. LOA was defined as modified independence (MI), supervision (S), minimal assistance (Min), and moderate assistance (Mod). Best effort EAW velocity, LOA, and observational gait analysis were recorded. RESULTS: Seven of 12 participants ambulated ≥ 0.40 m/s. Five participants walked with MI, 3 with S, 3 with Min, and 1 with Mod. Significant inverse relationships were noted between LOA and EAW velocity for both 6 MWT (Z value = 2.63, Rho = 0.79, P = .0086) and 10 MWT (Z value = 2.62, Rho = 0.79, P = .0088). There were 13 episodes of mild skin abrasions. MI and S groups ambulated with 2-point alternating crutch pattern, whereas the Min and Mod groups favored 3-point crutch gait. CONCLUSIONS: Seven of 12 individuals studied were able to ambulate at EAW velocities ≥ 0.40 m/s, which is a velocity that may be conducive to outdoor activity-related community ambulation. The ReWalk is a safe device for in-hospital ambulation.
BACKGROUND: Individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) often use a wheelchair for mobility due to paralysis. Powered exoskeletal-assisted walking (EAW) provides a modality for walking overground with crutches. Little is known about the EAW velocities and level of assistance (LOA) needed for these devices. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim was to evaluate EAW velocity, number of sessions, and LOA and the relationships among them. The secondary aims were to report on safety and the qualitative analysis of gait and posture during EAW in a hospital setting. METHODS: Twelve individuals with SCI ≥ 1.5 years who were wheelchair users participated. They wore a powered exoskeleton (ReWalk; ReWalk Robotics, Inc., Marlborough, MA) with Lofstrand crutches to complete 10-meter (10 MWT) and 6-minute (6MWT) walk tests. LOA was defined as modified independence (MI), supervision (S), minimal assistance (Min), and moderate assistance (Mod). Best effort EAW velocity, LOA, and observational gait analysis were recorded. RESULTS: Seven of 12 participants ambulated ≥ 0.40 m/s. Five participants walked with MI, 3 with S, 3 with Min, and 1 with Mod. Significant inverse relationships were noted between LOA and EAW velocity for both 6 MWT (Z value = 2.63, Rho = 0.79, P = .0086) and 10 MWT (Z value = 2.62, Rho = 0.79, P = .0088). There were 13 episodes of mild skin abrasions. MI and S groups ambulated with 2-point alternating crutch pattern, whereas the Min and Mod groups favored 3-point crutch gait. CONCLUSIONS: Seven of 12 individuals studied were able to ambulate at EAW velocities ≥ 0.40 m/s, which is a velocity that may be conducive to outdoor activity-related community ambulation. The ReWalk is a safe device for in-hospital ambulation.
Entities:
Keywords:
ReWalk; community ambulation; gait analysis; gait velocity; level of assistance; paralysis; powered exoskeleton; spinal cord injury
Authors: Gabi Zeilig; Harold Weingarden; Manuel Zwecker; Israel Dudkiewicz; Ayala Bloch; Alberto Esquenazi Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2012-02-07 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Arvind Ramanujam; Christopher M Cirnigliaro; Erica Garbarini; Pierre Asselin; Rakesh Pilkar; Gail F Forrest Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Pierre K Asselin; Manuel Avedissian; Steven Knezevic; Stephen Kornfeld; Ann M Spungen Journal: J Vis Exp Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 1.355
Authors: Luca Lonini; Nicholas Shawen; Kathleen Scanlan; William Z Rymer; Konrad P Kording; Arun Jayaraman Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil Date: 2016-03-31 Impact factor: 4.262
Authors: Christopher M Cirnigliaro; J Scott Parrott; Mary Jane Myslinski; Pierre Asselin; Alexander T Lombard; Michael F La Fountaine; Steven C Kirshblum; Gail F Forrest; Trevor Dyson-Hudson; Ann M Spungen; William A Bauman Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2019-10-30 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Chung-Ying Tsai; Pierre K Asselin; Eunkyoung Hong; Steven Knezevic; Stephen D Kornfeld; Noam Y Harel; Ann M Spungen Journal: Spinal Cord Ser Cases Date: 2021-03-12