Cargando…

Stage 2: Who Are the Best Candidates for Robotic Gait Training Rehabilitation in Hemiparetic Stroke?

We aimed to compare the effects of robotic-assisted gait training (RAGT) in patients with FAC < 2 (low initial functional ambulation category [LFAC]) and FAC ≥ 2 (high initial functional ambulation category [HFAC]) on sensorimotor and spasticity, balance and trunk stability, the number of steps a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oh, Wonjun, Park, Chanhee, Oh, Seungjun, You, Sung (Joshua) H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8658177/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34884417
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10235715
_version_ 1784612668613591040
author Oh, Wonjun
Park, Chanhee
Oh, Seungjun
You, Sung (Joshua) H.
author_facet Oh, Wonjun
Park, Chanhee
Oh, Seungjun
You, Sung (Joshua) H.
author_sort Oh, Wonjun
collection PubMed
description We aimed to compare the effects of robotic-assisted gait training (RAGT) in patients with FAC < 2 (low initial functional ambulation category [LFAC]) and FAC ≥ 2 (high initial functional ambulation category [HFAC]) on sensorimotor and spasticity, balance and trunk stability, the number of steps and walking distance in subacute hemiparetic stroke. Fifty-seven patients with subacute hemiparetic stroke (mean age, 63.86 ± 12.72 years; 23 women) were assigned to two groups. All patients received a 30-min Walkbot-assisted gait training session, 3 times/week, for 6 weeks. Clinical outcomes included scores obtained on the Fugl–Meyer Assessment (FMA) scale, Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), trunk impairment scale (TIS), and the number of walking steps and walking distance. Analysis of covariance and analysis of variance were conducted at p < 0.05. Significant main effects of time in both groups on number of walking steps and distance (p < 0.05) were observed, but not in MAS (p > 0.05). Significant changes in FMA, BBS, and TIS scores between groups (p < 0.05) were observed. Significant main effects of time on BBS and TIS were demonstrated (p < 0.05). Our study shows that RAGT can maximize improvement in the functional score of FMA, BBS, TIS, steps, and distance during neurorehabilitation of subacute stroke patients regardless of their FAC level.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8658177
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86581772021-12-10 Stage 2: Who Are the Best Candidates for Robotic Gait Training Rehabilitation in Hemiparetic Stroke? Oh, Wonjun Park, Chanhee Oh, Seungjun You, Sung (Joshua) H. J Clin Med Article We aimed to compare the effects of robotic-assisted gait training (RAGT) in patients with FAC < 2 (low initial functional ambulation category [LFAC]) and FAC ≥ 2 (high initial functional ambulation category [HFAC]) on sensorimotor and spasticity, balance and trunk stability, the number of steps and walking distance in subacute hemiparetic stroke. Fifty-seven patients with subacute hemiparetic stroke (mean age, 63.86 ± 12.72 years; 23 women) were assigned to two groups. All patients received a 30-min Walkbot-assisted gait training session, 3 times/week, for 6 weeks. Clinical outcomes included scores obtained on the Fugl–Meyer Assessment (FMA) scale, Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), trunk impairment scale (TIS), and the number of walking steps and walking distance. Analysis of covariance and analysis of variance were conducted at p < 0.05. Significant main effects of time in both groups on number of walking steps and distance (p < 0.05) were observed, but not in MAS (p > 0.05). Significant changes in FMA, BBS, and TIS scores between groups (p < 0.05) were observed. Significant main effects of time on BBS and TIS were demonstrated (p < 0.05). Our study shows that RAGT can maximize improvement in the functional score of FMA, BBS, TIS, steps, and distance during neurorehabilitation of subacute stroke patients regardless of their FAC level. MDPI 2021-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8658177/ /pubmed/34884417 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10235715 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Oh, Wonjun
Park, Chanhee
Oh, Seungjun
You, Sung (Joshua) H.
Stage 2: Who Are the Best Candidates for Robotic Gait Training Rehabilitation in Hemiparetic Stroke?
title Stage 2: Who Are the Best Candidates for Robotic Gait Training Rehabilitation in Hemiparetic Stroke?
title_full Stage 2: Who Are the Best Candidates for Robotic Gait Training Rehabilitation in Hemiparetic Stroke?
title_fullStr Stage 2: Who Are the Best Candidates for Robotic Gait Training Rehabilitation in Hemiparetic Stroke?
title_full_unstemmed Stage 2: Who Are the Best Candidates for Robotic Gait Training Rehabilitation in Hemiparetic Stroke?
title_short Stage 2: Who Are the Best Candidates for Robotic Gait Training Rehabilitation in Hemiparetic Stroke?
title_sort stage 2: who are the best candidates for robotic gait training rehabilitation in hemiparetic stroke?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8658177/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34884417
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10235715
work_keys_str_mv AT ohwonjun stage2whoarethebestcandidatesforroboticgaittrainingrehabilitationinhemipareticstroke
AT parkchanhee stage2whoarethebestcandidatesforroboticgaittrainingrehabilitationinhemipareticstroke
AT ohseungjun stage2whoarethebestcandidatesforroboticgaittrainingrehabilitationinhemipareticstroke
AT yousungjoshuah stage2whoarethebestcandidatesforroboticgaittrainingrehabilitationinhemipareticstroke