Evaluation of Robotic Exoskeletons Therapy for Gait Rehabilitation in Patients With Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury.
NCT ID: NCT03477123
Last Updated: 2020-07-07
Study Results
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.
COMPLETED
NA
20 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2016-01-01
2020-07-03
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Performance Attributes and User Progression While Using Ekso
NCT02132702
Improving Gait Performance in Individuals With Spinal Cord Injuries: an Intervention Using Robotic Exoskeletons
NCT03011099
Effectiveness of Automated Locomotor Training in Patients With Acute Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury: A Multicenter Trial
NCT01147185
Locomotor Training With Exoskeleton EKSO-GT in Patients With Incomplete Motor Spinal Cord Injury in a Hospital Setting
NCT02600013
Powered Exoskeleton Combined With Functional Electrical Stimulation in Clinical Practice
NCT04568928
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The aim of this proposal is to assess the efficacy of a new model of robotic exoskeleton (Exo H2) developed by the CSIC with HNP involvement in the context of HYPER project (Consolider 2009 call) in gait rehabilitation for people with incomplete spinal cord injury. A multicenter study is proposed here, involving the National Hospital of Paraplegics and the Institut Guttmann. Two randomized groups of patients with subacute incomplete spinal cord injury will be defined. In one group, protocol gait rehabilitation based on the Exo H2 will be established and traditional gait therapy will be adapted for control group. Both groups of patients were assessed performing a physical exam including functional gait scales (10 MWT, 6MWT, WISCI II score, SCIM) and a biomechanical gait analysis with kinetic and kinematic techniques. Functional assessment will be carried out before intervention, at the end of the intervention and a follow up six weeks later.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Intervention
Walking therapy with Exo-H2 exoskeleton
Walking therapy with Exo-H2 exoskeleton
Control
Group receiving conventional walking therapy without robotic exoskeleton
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Walking therapy with Exo-H2 exoskeleton
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* enough strength in the upper extremities to handle a walker or crutches (triceps brachial muscle balance ≥ 3)
* Age between 16 and 70 y.o.
* Heigth: 1.6-1.9m
* Weigth less than 120Kg
* Stable medical condition between 6 weeks and 18 months since injury.
* Subjects must tolerate standing and be included in walking rehabilitation program in the center.
* Lower limb spasticity should be lower than 3 as measyred by Ashworth scale.
Exclusion Criteria
* Upper limb pathology of any kind.
* irreducible flexo or arthrodesis in lower limb joints, 2 or more osteoporotic fractures in the lower limbs in the last 2 years
* Uncontrolled epilepsy.
* Ulcers sores at the contact points with the exoskeleton.
* Refuse to participate.
16 Years
70 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Institut Guttmann
OTHER
Hospital Nacional de Parapléjicos de Toledo
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Angel Gil-Agudo
PhD, MD, Head of Rehabilitation
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Angel Gil-Agudo, PhD, MD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Head of Rehabilitation Department
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
National Hospital for Paraplegics
Toledo, , Spain
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Ditunno PL, Patrick M, Stineman M, Ditunno JF. Who wants to walk? Preferences for recovery after SCI: a longitudinal and cross-sectional study. Spinal Cord. 2008 Jul;46(7):500-6. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3102172. Epub 2008 Jan 22.
Esquenazi A, Packel A. Robotic-assisted gait training and restoration. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Nov;91(11 Suppl 3):S217-27; quiz S228-31. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31826bce18.
Kwakkel G, Kollen B, Lindeman E. Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2004;22(3-5):281-99.
Chen G, Patten C. Treadmill training with harness support: selection of parameters for individuals with poststroke hemiparesis. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2006 Jul-Aug;43(4):485-98. doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2005.04.0063.
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.
Mantone J. Getting a leg up? Rehab patients get an assist from devices such as HealthSouth's AutoAmbulator, but the robots' clinical benefits are still in doubt. Mod Healthc. 2006 Feb 13;36(7):58-60. No abstract available.
Veneman JF, Kruidhof R, Hekman EE, Ekkelenkamp R, Van Asseldonk EH, van der Kooij H. Design and evaluation of the LOPES exoskeleton robot for interactive gait rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2007 Sep;15(3):379-86. doi: 10.1109/tnsre.2007.903919.
Tefertiller C, Pharo B, Evans N, Winchester P. Efficacy of rehabilitation robotics for walking training in neurological disorders: a review. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48(4):387-416. doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2010.04.0055.
Zeilig G, Weingarden H, Zwecker M, Dudkiewicz I, Bloch A, Esquenazi A. Safety and tolerance of the ReWalk exoskeleton suit for ambulation by people with complete spinal cord injury: a pilot study. J Spinal Cord Med. 2012 Mar;35(2):96-101. doi: 10.1179/2045772312Y.0000000003. Epub 2012 Feb 7.
Aach M, Cruciger O, Sczesny-Kaiser M, Hoffken O, Meindl RCh, Tegenthoff M, Schwenkreis P, Sankai Y, Schildhauer TA. Voluntary driven exoskeleton as a new tool for rehabilitation in chronic spinal cord injury: a pilot study. Spine J. 2014 Dec 1;14(12):2847-53. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.042. Epub 2014 Apr 4.
Jackson AB, Carnel CT, Ditunno JF, Read MS, Boninger ML, Schmeler MR, Williams SR, Donovan WH; Gait and Ambulation Subcommittee. Outcome measures for gait and ambulation in the spinal cord injury population. J Spinal Cord Med. 2008;31(5):487-99. doi: 10.1080/10790268.2008.11753644.
Ditunno J, Scivoletto G. Clinical relevance of gait research applied to clinical trials in spinal cord injury. Brain Res Bull. 2009 Jan 15;78(1):35-42. doi: 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2008.09.003. Epub 2008 Oct 9.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
PI15/01437
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.