Integrated, Practice-oriented Electromechanical-assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients
NCT ID: NCT03463746
Last Updated: 2018-03-13
Study Results
Results pending
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
Recruitment Status
UNKNOWN
Clinical Phase
NA
Total Enrollment
72 participants
Study Classification
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Start Date
2018-01-13
Study Completion Date
2020-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Background and Rationale:
Every year, more than a 15 million people worldwide suffer a stroke1. Despite laborious rehabilitation programs 70% of those stroke patients still show limited gait ability after three months.
Numerous RCTs have shown the superiority of over ground gait training and electromechanical-assisted gait devices in comparison with conventional over ground gait training alone. (Jan Mehrholz, Elsner, Werner, Kugler, \& Pohl, 2013) However, most of these trials used the electromechanical-assisted gait devices in a very high frequency which is almost impossible to achieve in daily clinical routine. Therefore, the effect of a practice-oriented physical therapy protocol including electromechanical-assisted gait training remains unclear.
Objective(s):
The aim of this clinical trial is to investigate the effects of an integrated, practice-orientated individual physical therapy protocol with or without electromechanical-assisted gait training in subacute stroke patients, respectively.
The effects of both physical therapy protocols will be compared with validated assessments covering the different components of the ICF framework: function, activity and participation.
Primary objectives: Effects on gait ability and on basic activities of daily living (ADL).
Secondary objectives: Effects on walking speed, walking capacity, functional mobility, muscle force, spasticity and reintegration to normal living (RNLI).
Furthermore, different training-related data are recorded to capture the efficiency (intensity and hassle) of both physical therapy protocols.
Every year, more than a 15 million people worldwide suffer a stroke1. Despite laborious rehabilitation programs 70% of those stroke patients still show limited gait ability after three months.
Numerous RCTs have shown the superiority of over ground gait training and electromechanical-assisted gait devices in comparison with conventional over ground gait training alone. (Jan Mehrholz, Elsner, Werner, Kugler, \& Pohl, 2013) However, most of these trials used the electromechanical-assisted gait devices in a very high frequency which is almost impossible to achieve in daily clinical routine. Therefore, the effect of a practice-oriented physical therapy protocol including electromechanical-assisted gait training remains unclear.
Objective(s):
The aim of this clinical trial is to investigate the effects of an integrated, practice-orientated individual physical therapy protocol with or without electromechanical-assisted gait training in subacute stroke patients, respectively.
The effects of both physical therapy protocols will be compared with validated assessments covering the different components of the ICF framework: function, activity and participation.
Primary objectives: Effects on gait ability and on basic activities of daily living (ADL).
Secondary objectives: Effects on walking speed, walking capacity, functional mobility, muscle force, spasticity and reintegration to normal living (RNLI).
Furthermore, different training-related data are recorded to capture the efficiency (intensity and hassle) of both physical therapy protocols.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Effects on Subacute Stroke With Robotic Assistive Gait Training
NCT07040215
Stroke
Stroke Gait Rehabilitation
RECRUITING
NA
Effect of Overground Gait Training Using a Torgue-Assisted Exoskeletal Wearable Device on Ambulatory Function in Subacute Stroke Patients
NCT05157347
Subacute Stroke
UNKNOWN
NA
Early Robotic Gait Training After Stroke
NCT06430632
Stroke
RECRUITING
NA
Walking Therapy In Hemiparetic Stroke Patients Using Robotic-Assisted Treadmill Training
NCT00075283
Hemiparesis
Stroke
UNKNOWN
PHASE1
Robot-Assisted Training Versus Standard Training in Ischemic Stroke
NCT06273475
Stroke
Ischemic Stroke
RECRUITING
NA
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Background and Rationale:
Every year, more than a 15 million people worldwide suffer a stroke1. Despite laborious rehabilitation programs 70% of those stroke patients still show limited gait ability after three months.
Numerous RCTs have shown the superiority of over ground gait training and electromechanical-assisted gait devices in comparison with conventional over ground gait training alone. (Jan Mehrholz, Elsner, Werner, Kugler, \& Pohl, 2013) However, most of these trials used the electromechanical-assisted gait devices in a very high frequency which is almost impossible to achieve in daily clinical routine. Therefore, the effect of a practice-oriented physical therapy protocol including electromechanical-assisted gait training remains unclear.
Objective(s):
The aim of this clinical trial is to investigate the effects of an integrated, practice-orientated individual physical therapy protocol with or without electromechanical-assisted gait training in subacute stroke patients, respectively.
The effects of both physical therapy protocols will be compared with validated assessments covering the different components of the ICF framework: function, activity and participation.
Primary objectives: Effects on gait ability and on basic activities of daily living (ADL).
Secondary objectives: Effects on walking speed, walking capacity, functional mobility, muscle force, spasticity and reintegration to normal living (RNLI).
Furthermore, different training-related data are recorded to capture the efficiency (intensity and hassle) of both physical therapy protocols.
Detailed Description:
Background and Rationale:
With 16.9 million people suffered a first stroke and almost six million stroke-related deaths worldwide in 2010, stroke was ranked as the second most common cause of death at the age of over 65 years (Lozano et al., 2012). Although mortality-to-incidence ratios have decreased, the global burden of stroke in terms of the absolute number of people affected every year and stroke-related deaths are increasing (Krishnamurthi et al., 2013). Taking into account the demographic changes of our society up to 12 million stroke deaths and 70 million stroke survivors are expected in 2030 (Krishnamurthi et al., 2013).
In Switzerland 15'000 people suffer a stroke every year (Jorgensen, Nakayama, Raaschou, \& Olsen, 1995). Three months after stroke 20% of the affected patients are still bound to a wheelchair and 70% show limited gait ability, therefore, the restoration of gait ability is one of the most important therapy goals. Since motor restoration especially takes place during the first six months the choice of a proper gait therapy is of great importance (Jorgensen et al., 1995).
Since repetition and task-specific activity have been shown to be key factors for motor (re)-learning (Kwakkel, Kollen, \& Lindeman, 2004) (French et al., 2007) treadmill training with body weight support has been implemented in stroke rehabilitation. However, no superiority of treadmill training compared to conventional over ground gait training could have been shown to date. Especially patients who cannot walk at all don't seem to benefit from treadmill training to a greater extent (J Mehrholz et al., 2014). A possible explanation therefor is the tremendous therapeutic effort needed to move severely impaired patients on a treadmill. To obtain a higher therapeutic efficiency (reduce therapeutic effort and increased number of steps) electromechanical-assisted gait devices have been developed. During electromechanical-assisted gait therapy the patient is either moved by the means of a robotic-driven exoskeleton orthosis (exoskeleton device) (Colombo, Joerg, Schreier, \& Dietz, 2000) or two mechanically driven foot plates simulating the gait pattern (end-effector device) (Hesse, Sarkodie-Gyan, \& Uhlenbrock, 1999).
Over the last decade different studies have evaluated the effect of the implementation of the exoskeleton and end-effector devices within the rehabilitation process of stroke patients (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2013). RCTs have shown the superiority of the combination of conventional over ground gait training supplemented by electromechanical-assisted gait devices in comparison with conventional over ground gait training alone (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2013). Especially non-ambulatory patients in the subacute phase (\< 3 months after stroke) benefit from this type of intervention. Furthermore, the choice of the right gait device matters. A sub analysis showed a statistically significant difference in the recovery of walking speed in favor of the end-effector compared to exoskeleton devices (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2013). The largest study ever performed with an end-effector device, "Deutsche Gangtrainer Studie (DEGAS)" showed that a training program of 20 therapy sessions each consisting of 20 minutes walking on an end-effector device combined with 25 minutes of conventional physiotherapy more than doubles the chance of regaining an independent gait ability compared to the same dosage of conventional physiotherapy alone (Pohl et al., 2007). Furthermore, the use of electromechanical-assisted gait therapy is safe and does not result in more adverse events (AE) than conventional physiotherapy (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2013).
Many of the performed RCTs with electromechanical-assisted gait therapy have chosen a high training intensity of up to five training sessions per week. According to those findings the German Society for Neurorehabilitation (DGNR) recommends in the so-called S2e-Guidelines "Rehabilitation der Mobilität nach Schlaganfall (ReMoS)" a training dosage of 500-1000 steps per day for non-ambulatory stroke patients (Loipl \& Wittenberg, 2015). In daily clinical routine however, it is almost impossible to achieve such a high training intensity due to limited resources. Thus, it remains unclear whether a realistic therapy program including around three electromechanical-assisted gait training sessions per week leads to the same beneficial effects on gait ability. Therefore, the aim of this clinical trial is to investigate the effects of electromechanical-assisted gait training within an integrated, practice-orientated physical therapy protocol, which is compared to the effects of the same amount of physical therapy without electromechanical-assisted gait training in subacute stroke patients.
Study 0verall Objective:
The aim of this clinical trial is to investigate the effects of an integrated, practice-orientated individual physical therapy protocol with respectively without electromechanical-assisted gait training in subacute stroke patients.
Primary Objective:
To compare the effect of both physical therapy protocols with respect to gait ability and competence in basic ADL.
Secondary Objectives:
To compare the effect of both physical therapy protocols with respect to walking speed, walking capacity, functional mobility, muscle force, spasticity, and RNLI.
As further objectives, different training-related data are recorded to capture the efficiency (intensity and hassle) of both physical therapy protocols.
Safety Objectives The risks of this study are kept to a minimum. No specific safety objectives have been defined.
Primary Study Outcome:
The changes in gait ability and the competence in basic ADL are determined as primary outcomes. Both are assessed before and after the four-week intervention period (to proof short term effects) as well as three months after the end of the intevention period (3months FU).
Gait ability and competence in basic ADL are regarded as to be the most important therapy goals of subacute stroke patients. Furthermore, these outcomes were also used in other clinical trials with electromechanical-assisted gait training making results comparable.
Gait ability (ICF-level activity):
To assess gait ability the FAC is performed. The FAC is technically simple, inexpensive, reliable and sensitive to change in the assessment of patients after stroke who cannot walk without personal assistance at the beginning of their inpatient rehabilitation. The FAC provides information about the way of physical (not technical e.g. walking aids, orthosis) assistance that is needed for walking.
Competence in basic ADL (ICF-level activity):
To assess competence in basic ADL the FIM is performed (ANQ, 2013). The FIM shows an excellent test-retest-reliability (Hobart et al., 2001), an excellent internal consistency, excellent criterion validity and high responsiveness (for the motor subscale) in stroke patients (Jan Mehrholz, Wagner, Rutte, Meißner, \& Pohl, 2007). The nurses from ZRW assess the FIM in every rehabilitation service unit on a weekly basis(Tyson \& Connell, 2009). Therefore, a high level of standardisation is given.
Secondary Outcomes:
The changes in walking speed, walking capacity, muscle force, spasticity, functional mobility and RNLI are determined as secondary outcomes. All secondary outcomes except RNLI are assessed before and after the four-week intervention period. RNLI is measured at the 3months FU.
Walking speed (ICF-level activity):
To assess walking speed the 10mWT is performed. The 10mWT is a simple, highly reliable and valid test for the assessment of walking speed in stroke patients (Tyson \& Connell, 2009). It is carried out in patients with a FAC-level \>=2. Lower FAC-levels are not tested.
Walking capacity (ICF-level activity):
To assess walking capacity the 6minWT is performed. The 6minWT is a simple and valid test which is used to assess maximum walking distance. It shows adequate reliability and excellent validity in stroke patients (Kosak \& Smith, 2005). The 6minWT is carried out in patients with FAC-Level \>=2. Lower FAC-levels are not tested.
Functional Mobility (ICF-level activity):
For the assessment of mobility, the DEMMI is chosen. The DEMMI consists of 17 basic everyday mobility tasks differentiating between 5 conditions (bed, chair, static balance, walking and dynamic balance) (de Morton, Davidson, \& Keating, 2008). The DEMMI is a practical, short and valid mobility test for geriatric and stroke patients that is sensitive to detect changes (Braun et al., 2015).
Muscular Strength lower extremities (ICF-level structure/function):
Change of lower extremities muscular strength is measured with the Motricity Index (MI). Due to the present intervention studied only the muscle force of the lower limbs will be evaluated (hip flexion, knee extension, ankle dorsiflexion). Previous studies have shown that the MI is a valid, reliable and sensitive tool that is short and easily to apply (Collin \& Wade, 1990; Demeurisse, Demol, \& Robaye, 1980).
Spasticity (ICF-level structure/function):
Quantification of spasticity of the affected lower limb is carried out with the mTS. The mTS has shown to have very good test-retest reliability and sensitivity that is high enough to measure changes pre-post treatment (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2005).
Reintegration to normal living (ICF-level participation):
For the assessment of the ICF level participation the RNLI is chosen. The instrument can be used to evaluate the degree to which the patient has been able to return to a normal life (Wood-Dauphinee \& Williams, 1987).
Every year, more than a 15 million people worldwide suffer a stroke1. Despite laborious rehabilitation programs 70% of those stroke patients still show limited gait ability after three months.
Numerous RCTs have shown the superiority of over ground gait training and electromechanical-assisted gait devices in comparison with conventional over ground gait training alone. (Jan Mehrholz, Elsner, Werner, Kugler, \& Pohl, 2013) However, most of these trials used the electromechanical-assisted gait devices in a very high frequency which is almost impossible to achieve in daily clinical routine. Therefore, the effect of a practice-oriented physical therapy protocol including electromechanical-assisted gait training remains unclear.
Objective(s):
The aim of this clinical trial is to investigate the effects of an integrated, practice-orientated individual physical therapy protocol with or without electromechanical-assisted gait training in subacute stroke patients, respectively.
The effects of both physical therapy protocols will be compared with validated assessments covering the different components of the ICF framework: function, activity and participation.
Primary objectives: Effects on gait ability and on basic activities of daily living (ADL).
Secondary objectives: Effects on walking speed, walking capacity, functional mobility, muscle force, spasticity and reintegration to normal living (RNLI).
Furthermore, different training-related data are recorded to capture the efficiency (intensity and hassle) of both physical therapy protocols.
Detailed Description:
Background and Rationale:
With 16.9 million people suffered a first stroke and almost six million stroke-related deaths worldwide in 2010, stroke was ranked as the second most common cause of death at the age of over 65 years (Lozano et al., 2012). Although mortality-to-incidence ratios have decreased, the global burden of stroke in terms of the absolute number of people affected every year and stroke-related deaths are increasing (Krishnamurthi et al., 2013). Taking into account the demographic changes of our society up to 12 million stroke deaths and 70 million stroke survivors are expected in 2030 (Krishnamurthi et al., 2013).
In Switzerland 15'000 people suffer a stroke every year (Jorgensen, Nakayama, Raaschou, \& Olsen, 1995). Three months after stroke 20% of the affected patients are still bound to a wheelchair and 70% show limited gait ability, therefore, the restoration of gait ability is one of the most important therapy goals. Since motor restoration especially takes place during the first six months the choice of a proper gait therapy is of great importance (Jorgensen et al., 1995).
Since repetition and task-specific activity have been shown to be key factors for motor (re)-learning (Kwakkel, Kollen, \& Lindeman, 2004) (French et al., 2007) treadmill training with body weight support has been implemented in stroke rehabilitation. However, no superiority of treadmill training compared to conventional over ground gait training could have been shown to date. Especially patients who cannot walk at all don't seem to benefit from treadmill training to a greater extent (J Mehrholz et al., 2014). A possible explanation therefor is the tremendous therapeutic effort needed to move severely impaired patients on a treadmill. To obtain a higher therapeutic efficiency (reduce therapeutic effort and increased number of steps) electromechanical-assisted gait devices have been developed. During electromechanical-assisted gait therapy the patient is either moved by the means of a robotic-driven exoskeleton orthosis (exoskeleton device) (Colombo, Joerg, Schreier, \& Dietz, 2000) or two mechanically driven foot plates simulating the gait pattern (end-effector device) (Hesse, Sarkodie-Gyan, \& Uhlenbrock, 1999).
Over the last decade different studies have evaluated the effect of the implementation of the exoskeleton and end-effector devices within the rehabilitation process of stroke patients (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2013). RCTs have shown the superiority of the combination of conventional over ground gait training supplemented by electromechanical-assisted gait devices in comparison with conventional over ground gait training alone (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2013). Especially non-ambulatory patients in the subacute phase (\< 3 months after stroke) benefit from this type of intervention. Furthermore, the choice of the right gait device matters. A sub analysis showed a statistically significant difference in the recovery of walking speed in favor of the end-effector compared to exoskeleton devices (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2013). The largest study ever performed with an end-effector device, "Deutsche Gangtrainer Studie (DEGAS)" showed that a training program of 20 therapy sessions each consisting of 20 minutes walking on an end-effector device combined with 25 minutes of conventional physiotherapy more than doubles the chance of regaining an independent gait ability compared to the same dosage of conventional physiotherapy alone (Pohl et al., 2007). Furthermore, the use of electromechanical-assisted gait therapy is safe and does not result in more adverse events (AE) than conventional physiotherapy (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2013).
Many of the performed RCTs with electromechanical-assisted gait therapy have chosen a high training intensity of up to five training sessions per week. According to those findings the German Society for Neurorehabilitation (DGNR) recommends in the so-called S2e-Guidelines "Rehabilitation der Mobilität nach Schlaganfall (ReMoS)" a training dosage of 500-1000 steps per day for non-ambulatory stroke patients (Loipl \& Wittenberg, 2015). In daily clinical routine however, it is almost impossible to achieve such a high training intensity due to limited resources. Thus, it remains unclear whether a realistic therapy program including around three electromechanical-assisted gait training sessions per week leads to the same beneficial effects on gait ability. Therefore, the aim of this clinical trial is to investigate the effects of electromechanical-assisted gait training within an integrated, practice-orientated physical therapy protocol, which is compared to the effects of the same amount of physical therapy without electromechanical-assisted gait training in subacute stroke patients.
Study 0verall Objective:
The aim of this clinical trial is to investigate the effects of an integrated, practice-orientated individual physical therapy protocol with respectively without electromechanical-assisted gait training in subacute stroke patients.
Primary Objective:
To compare the effect of both physical therapy protocols with respect to gait ability and competence in basic ADL.
Secondary Objectives:
To compare the effect of both physical therapy protocols with respect to walking speed, walking capacity, functional mobility, muscle force, spasticity, and RNLI.
As further objectives, different training-related data are recorded to capture the efficiency (intensity and hassle) of both physical therapy protocols.
Safety Objectives The risks of this study are kept to a minimum. No specific safety objectives have been defined.
Primary Study Outcome:
The changes in gait ability and the competence in basic ADL are determined as primary outcomes. Both are assessed before and after the four-week intervention period (to proof short term effects) as well as three months after the end of the intevention period (3months FU).
Gait ability and competence in basic ADL are regarded as to be the most important therapy goals of subacute stroke patients. Furthermore, these outcomes were also used in other clinical trials with electromechanical-assisted gait training making results comparable.
Gait ability (ICF-level activity):
To assess gait ability the FAC is performed. The FAC is technically simple, inexpensive, reliable and sensitive to change in the assessment of patients after stroke who cannot walk without personal assistance at the beginning of their inpatient rehabilitation. The FAC provides information about the way of physical (not technical e.g. walking aids, orthosis) assistance that is needed for walking.
Competence in basic ADL (ICF-level activity):
To assess competence in basic ADL the FIM is performed (ANQ, 2013). The FIM shows an excellent test-retest-reliability (Hobart et al., 2001), an excellent internal consistency, excellent criterion validity and high responsiveness (for the motor subscale) in stroke patients (Jan Mehrholz, Wagner, Rutte, Meißner, \& Pohl, 2007). The nurses from ZRW assess the FIM in every rehabilitation service unit on a weekly basis(Tyson \& Connell, 2009). Therefore, a high level of standardisation is given.
Secondary Outcomes:
The changes in walking speed, walking capacity, muscle force, spasticity, functional mobility and RNLI are determined as secondary outcomes. All secondary outcomes except RNLI are assessed before and after the four-week intervention period. RNLI is measured at the 3months FU.
Walking speed (ICF-level activity):
To assess walking speed the 10mWT is performed. The 10mWT is a simple, highly reliable and valid test for the assessment of walking speed in stroke patients (Tyson \& Connell, 2009). It is carried out in patients with a FAC-level \>=2. Lower FAC-levels are not tested.
Walking capacity (ICF-level activity):
To assess walking capacity the 6minWT is performed. The 6minWT is a simple and valid test which is used to assess maximum walking distance. It shows adequate reliability and excellent validity in stroke patients (Kosak \& Smith, 2005). The 6minWT is carried out in patients with FAC-Level \>=2. Lower FAC-levels are not tested.
Functional Mobility (ICF-level activity):
For the assessment of mobility, the DEMMI is chosen. The DEMMI consists of 17 basic everyday mobility tasks differentiating between 5 conditions (bed, chair, static balance, walking and dynamic balance) (de Morton, Davidson, \& Keating, 2008). The DEMMI is a practical, short and valid mobility test for geriatric and stroke patients that is sensitive to detect changes (Braun et al., 2015).
Muscular Strength lower extremities (ICF-level structure/function):
Change of lower extremities muscular strength is measured with the Motricity Index (MI). Due to the present intervention studied only the muscle force of the lower limbs will be evaluated (hip flexion, knee extension, ankle dorsiflexion). Previous studies have shown that the MI is a valid, reliable and sensitive tool that is short and easily to apply (Collin \& Wade, 1990; Demeurisse, Demol, \& Robaye, 1980).
Spasticity (ICF-level structure/function):
Quantification of spasticity of the affected lower limb is carried out with the mTS. The mTS has shown to have very good test-retest reliability and sensitivity that is high enough to measure changes pre-post treatment (Jan Mehrholz et al., 2005).
Reintegration to normal living (ICF-level participation):
For the assessment of the ICF level participation the RNLI is chosen. The instrument can be used to evaluate the degree to which the patient has been able to return to a normal life (Wood-Dauphinee \& Williams, 1987).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Stroke
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Allocation Method
RANDOMIZED
Intervention Model
SINGLE_GROUP
Monocentric, randomised-controlled, single-blind trial.
Primary Study Purpose
TREATMENT
Blinding Strategy
SINGLE
Outcome Assessors
Only assessors of the primary outcomes will be blinded to group assignment
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Experimental group (EG)
Subacute stroke patients will get standard individual physical therapy 2x/week, 45min and electromechanical-assisted gait training on LYRA® gait trainer 3x/week, 45min.
Group Type
EXPERIMENTAL
LYRA® gait trainer
Intervention Type
DEVICE
The EG will get standard individual physical therapy (5x/week, 45min) whereby three sessions of electromechanical-assisted gait training on LYRA® gait trainer.
Comparator group (CG)
The CG will get standard individual physical therapy 5x/week, 45min without any instrument-based locomotion therapy (i.e. treadmill training, electromechanical/robot-assisted gait training).
Group Type
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR
Standard individual physical therapy
Intervention Type
DEVICE
The CG will get standard individual physical therapy (5x/week, 45min) without any instrument-based locomotion therapy (i.e. treadmill training, electromechanical/robot-assisted gait training).
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
LYRA® gait trainer
The EG will get standard individual physical therapy (5x/week, 45min) whereby three sessions of electromechanical-assisted gait training on LYRA® gait trainer.
Intervention Type
DEVICE
Standard individual physical therapy
The CG will get standard individual physical therapy (5x/week, 45min) without any instrument-based locomotion therapy (i.e. treadmill training, electromechanical/robot-assisted gait training).
Intervention Type
DEVICE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* age: 18- 80 years
* diagnosis: first-time supratentorial stroke (ischaemic/haemorrhagic)
* time after stroke (at admission): \<42 days
* not able to walk independently (FAC 0-2)
* able to sit unsupported without holding (but with floor contact) on the edge of the bed for at least 2min
* written informed consent
* diagnosis: first-time supratentorial stroke (ischaemic/haemorrhagic)
* time after stroke (at admission): \<42 days
* not able to walk independently (FAC 0-2)
* able to sit unsupported without holding (but with floor contact) on the edge of the bed for at least 2min
* written informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
* hip, knee, ankle arthrodesis
* bone instability (non-consolidated fractures, unstable spina column, severe osteoporosis)
* unstable vital functions, e.g. cardio-vascular or pulmonary functions
* severe impaired consciousness functions (ICF b110)
* severe vascular disorders of the lower limb
* severe cognitive deficits (not able to understand and follow test instructions and/or training protocol)
* severely fixed contractures
* mechanical ventilation
* open skin lesions in the area of the torso
* patients with extremly disproportionate growth of legs and/or spinal column (e.g. bone or cartilage dysplasie)
* patients with acute infection
* body weight \> 150kg
* bone instability (non-consolidated fractures, unstable spina column, severe osteoporosis)
* unstable vital functions, e.g. cardio-vascular or pulmonary functions
* severe impaired consciousness functions (ICF b110)
* severe vascular disorders of the lower limb
* severe cognitive deficits (not able to understand and follow test instructions and/or training protocol)
* severely fixed contractures
* mechanical ventilation
* open skin lesions in the area of the torso
* patients with extremly disproportionate growth of legs and/or spinal column (e.g. bone or cartilage dysplasie)
* patients with acute infection
* body weight \> 150kg
Minimum Eligible Age
18 Years
Maximum Eligible Age
80 Years
Eligible Sex
ALL
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Zürcher RehaZentrum Wald
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Responsibility Role
SPONSOR
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Antonella Palla, MD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Züricher RehaZentrum Wald
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Zurcher RehaZentrum Wald
Wald, Canton of Zurich, Switzerland
Site Status
RECRUITING
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Switzerland
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Mehrholz J, Elsner B, Werner C, Kugler J, Pohl M. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jul 25;2013(7):CD006185. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub3.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Moseley AM, Stark A, Cameron ID, Pollock A. Treadmill training and body weight support for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(3):CD002840. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002840.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Krishnamurthi RV, Feigin VL, Forouzanfar MH, Mensah GA, Connor M, Bennett DA, Moran AE, Sacco RL, Anderson LM, Truelsen T, O'Donnell M, Venketasubramanian N, Barker-Collo S, Lawes CM, Wang W, Shinohara Y, Witt E, Ezzati M, Naghavi M, Murray C; Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, Risk Factors Study 2010 (GBD 2010); GBD Stroke Experts Group. Global and regional burden of first-ever ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke during 1990-2010: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet Glob Health. 2013 Nov;1(5):e259-81. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(13)70089-5. Epub 2013 Oct 24.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Jorgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Recovery of walking function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995 Jan;76(1):27-32. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(95)80038-7.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Buurke JH, Nene AV, Kwakkel G, Erren-Wolters V, Ijzerman MJ, Hermens HJ. Recovery of gait after stroke: what changes? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008 Nov-Dec;22(6):676-83. doi: 10.1177/1545968308317972.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, Sutton CJ, McAdam J, Forster A, Langhorne P, Price CI, Walker A, Watkins CL. Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Oct 17;(4):CD006073. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006073.pub2.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Colombo G, Joerg M, Schreier R, Dietz V. Treadmill training of paraplegic patients using a robotic orthosis. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000 Nov-Dec;37(6):693-700.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Hesse S, Sarkodie-Gyan T, Uhlenbrock D. Development of an advanced mechanised gait trainer, controlling movement of the centre of mass, for restoring gait in non-ambulant subjects. Biomed Tech (Berl). 1999 Jul-Aug;44(7-8):194-201. doi: 10.1515/bmte.1999.44.7-8.194.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Lyra
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Therapeutic Effects of Robotic Exoskeleton-Assisted Gait Re-habilitation and Predictive Factors of Significant Improvements in Stroke Patients
NCT05825144
UNKNOWN
NA
The Effects of Gait Rehabilitation After Stroke by Treadmill-based Robotics Versus Traditional Gait Training
NCT03688165
COMPLETED
Effects of a Lower Limb Strength Training Program on a Seated Robotic Device in Patients
NCT05020171
TERMINATED
NA
Effects of Exoskeleton-Assisted Gait Training on Functional Rehabilitation Outcomes in Patients With Stroke
NCT03980457
RECRUITING
NA
Effect of Lyra Gait Training on the Mobility of Geriatric Rehabilitation Inpatients
NCT03558841
TERMINATED
NA
Replacing Canes With an Elasticated Orthosis in Chronic Stroke Patients: The Influence on Gait and Balance. A Series of N-of-1 Trials
NCT03642444
COMPLETED
NA
Achieving Meaningful Clinical Benchmarks With Ekso Gait Training During Acute Stroke Inpatient Rehabilitation.
NCT05241457
RECRUITING
Electrically Assisted Movement Therapy
NCT02563886
UNKNOWN
NA
Robot-Assisted Gait Therapy in the Subacute Phase of First Ischemic Stroke
NCT04910217
RECRUITING
NA
The Effects of Passive Gait Training in Complete Motor Spinal Cord Injury (SCI)
NCT01349478
COMPLETED
PHASE1/PHASE2
Clinical Trial of Robot-assisted-gait-training (RAGT) in Stroke Patients
NCT02694302
COMPLETED
NA
Walkbot Robotic Training for Improvement in Gait
NCT03554642
COMPLETED
PHASE3
Robot-Assisted Gait Training in Early-Subacute Stroke
NCT06233734
RECRUITING
Balance Training After Stroke - a Randomized, Controled Pilot Study
NCT03791671
COMPLETED
NA
Effects of Locomotion Training With Assistance of a Robot-Driven Gait Orthosis in Hemiparetic Patients After Subacute Stroke
NCT01726998
COMPLETED
NA
Gait Adaptability: Tracking Locomotor Recovery After Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury
NCT03343132
COMPLETED
Efficacy of End-Effector Robot-Assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients
NCT03805009
COMPLETED
NA
Usability of Andago V2.0 in Gait Rehabilitation of Stroke Patients
NCT02735460
COMPLETED
NA
The Effects of Neurorehabilitation Approaches Involving Different Upper Extremity Reactive Trainings in Stroke Patients
NCT06086314
COMPLETED
NA
The Effect of Robot-Assisted Gait Training With or Without Plantar Pressure Summary Feedback: Impact on Gait Symmetry and Balance in Hemiplegic Patients
NCT07336667
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Gait Training for Persons With Stroke
NCT00612300
COMPLETED
EARLY_PHASE1
Effectiveness of Multiple Robotic Gait-Devices for Improving Walking Ability in Subacute Stroke Patients
NCT05811494
WITHDRAWN
NA
Efficacy of a Mechanical Gait Repetitive Training Technique in Hemiparetic Stroke Patients (AVC)
NCT00284115
TERMINATED
NA
Enhanced Treadmill Gait Training With Lower Limb Support After Stroke
NCT03348215
COMPLETED
NA