The Effects of Gait Rehabilitation After Stroke by Treadmill-based Robotics Versus Traditional Gait Training
NCT ID: NCT03688165
Last Updated: 2025-04-02
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
87 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2018-06-20
2022-07-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
All the eligible subjects admitted to rehabilitation centers, both in the subacute phase will be recorded. The experimental group will follow a set of robotic gait training on stationary robotic systems which do not provide overground gait training (Lokomat Pro - Hocoma AG, Volketswil, Switzerland; G-EO System - Reha technologies, Italy). While, the control group will follow traditional gait training composed of all those exercises which promote the recovery of walking ability (please, see the details of the interventions).
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Efficacy of End-Effector Robot-Assisted Gait Training Combined With Robotic Balance Training in Subacute Stroke Patients
NCT04162197
Rehabilitation With and Without Robot and Allied Digital Technologies in Stroke Patients
NCT06547827
Effectiveness of an Exoskeleton Gait Training Versus Manual Therapy in Subacute Post Stroke Patients.
NCT02095795
Comparison Of Two Different Type Robot Assisted Gait Training In Rehabilitation Of Stroke
NCT03565185
Therapeutic Effects of Robotic Exoskeleton-Assisted Gait Re-habilitation and Predictive Factors of Significant Improvements in Stroke Patients
NCT05825144
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
* to investigate the efficacy of a treadmill-based robotic treatment (both end-effector and exoskeleton) compared to the conventional rehabilitative treatment on gait recovery in stroke survivors;
* to verify different effects of the end-effector or exoskeleton system on stroke subjects with different disabilities.
All the eligible subjects (please, see the inclusion and exclusion criteria), admitted to the study participant centers for rehabilitation treatment, will be recorded at any stage of the rehabilitation program (subacute or chronic phase).
The patient's recruitment will run following the authorization of the respective Ethics Committees for 12 months.
Both experimental or control group will be undergone to 20 sessions of treatments, from 3 to 5 times per week, each lasting 60 minutes ( for a total of 400 minutes of treatment) All robotic systems used in this study for the experimental group (Lokomat Pro - Hocoma AG, Volketswil, Switzerland; G-EO System - Rehatechnologies, Italy) are treadmill-based and do not provide the over-ground gait training. They are characterized by the possibility of a programmable load suspension, as well as speed, stride length. The patient's activity with the related data is always displayed and stored with a computerized control system.
The control group will follow a traditional gait rehabilitation for the same duration as the experimental group.
The clinical assessments and data analysis will be carried out blindly.
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.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Treadmill-based Robotic Gait Training
The Treadmill-based Robotic Gait Training (TRGT) period will last 20 sessions, 3-5 days/week for at least 400' of exercise totally. The parameters to be respected for the robotic training will be the following for all patients: 0.9 km / h starting speed up to a maximum of 2.5 km / h; weight support not exceeding 40-45% of the body weight at the beginning and gradual progressive reduction depending on the case; for Lokomat: maximum assistance required at the start of treatment and gradual decrease during the treatment. The TRGT will always be associated with the traditional gait rehabilitation, and will be part of the Individual Rehabilitation Project which normally includes 3 hours of rehabilitation treatments for patients in the subacute phase, 60' of treatment for those in chronic phase.
Treadmill-based Robotic Gait Training
All the stroke survivors admitted to the participating centers and eligible for the study will follow a gait training protocol (treadmill-based or overground). The data will be registered at baseline (T0), end of treatment (T1) and at three months follow up (T2). All robotic systems used for the study (Lokomat Pro - Hocoma AG, Volketswil, Switzerland); G-EO System - Reha technologies, Italy) are treadmill-based and do not provide the over-ground gait training. They are characterized by the possibility of a programmable weight support, as well as speed and stride length. The data relating to the patients' training is always displayed and stored with a computerized control system.
Traditional Over-ground Gait Training
The Traditional Over-ground Gait Training (TOGT) period will last 20 sessions, 3-5 days / week for a total time that corresponds to the same total time of traditional overground gait training, or at least 400' totally at the end of the period.
By Traditional Therapy we mean any technical approach aimed at achieving control of the postural passages from sitting upright, of load transfer in laterality and antero-posterior in orthostatism and reorganization of the step up to the assisted path to the parallels and then with various aids.
Traditional Over-ground Gait Training
Traditional treatment for gait training consists in any conventional technical approach aimed at achieving control of the postural passages from sitting upright, of load transfer in laterality and antero-posterior in orthostatism and reorganization of the step up to the assisted path to the parallels and then with various aids.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Treadmill-based Robotic Gait Training
All the stroke survivors admitted to the participating centers and eligible for the study will follow a gait training protocol (treadmill-based or overground). The data will be registered at baseline (T0), end of treatment (T1) and at three months follow up (T2). All robotic systems used for the study (Lokomat Pro - Hocoma AG, Volketswil, Switzerland); G-EO System - Reha technologies, Italy) are treadmill-based and do not provide the over-ground gait training. They are characterized by the possibility of a programmable weight support, as well as speed and stride length. The data relating to the patients' training is always displayed and stored with a computerized control system.
Traditional Over-ground Gait Training
Traditional treatment for gait training consists in any conventional technical approach aimed at achieving control of the postural passages from sitting upright, of load transfer in laterality and antero-posterior in orthostatism and reorganization of the step up to the assisted path to the parallels and then with various aids.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* first ever event of pyramidal hemisyndrome (any functional level and etiology);
* possibility to understand and execute simple instructions, for performing correctly the robot exercise;
* for chronic patients: Functional Ambulation Category (FAC)\> 1.
Exclusion Criteria
* Walking Handicap Scale (WHS) \<5 before the acute event;
* cognitive or behavioral deficit as to compromise the comprehension of the robotic training;
* neurolytic treatment with botulinum toxin in the previous 3 months and/or during the study (including follow up);
* use of other technologies (robots, FES, TDCS ...) during the study;
* impossibility or non-availability to provide the informed consent;
* cardiorespiratory gravity-morbidity
18 Years
85 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Ospedale Santo Stefano
OTHER
APSS Trento
UNKNOWN
Azienda Sanitaria n. 4 Chiavarese
OTHER
Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus
OTHER
Azienda Ospedaliera San Gerardo di Monza
OTHER
University Hospital of Ferrara
OTHER
Privatklinik Villa Melitta
OTHER
Centro Ricerche Cliniche di Verona
OTHER
Unità di Neuroriabilitazione, HABILITA
UNKNOWN
Istituto Piero Redaelli, Milano
UNKNOWN
S. Anna Hospital
OTHER
Azienda Sanitaria Locale n.2 Savonese
OTHER
Fondazione Centri di Riabilitazione Padre Pio Onlus
UNKNOWN
Habilita, Ospedale di Sarnico
OTHER
I.R.C.C.S. Fondazione Santa Lucia
OTHER
Azienda Ospedaliero, Universitaria Pisana
OTHER
Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale di Mantova
OTHER
IRCCS San Raffaele Roma
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Marco Franceschini, MD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana
Sanaz Pournajaf, Dr
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
IRCCS San Raffaele Pisana
Roma, Italy, Italy
U.O.C. Medicina Fisica e Riabilitazione, osp.S.Gerardo
Monza, Lombardy, Italy
Irccs Centro Neurolesi Bonino Pulejo
Messina, , Italy
Irccs Fondazione Santa Lucia
Roma, , Italy
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.
Awad LN, Reisman DS, Pohlig RT, Binder-Macleod SA. Identifying candidates for targeted gait rehabilitation after stroke: better prediction through biomechanics-informed characterization. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 Sep 23;13(1):84. doi: 10.1186/s12984-016-0188-8.
Bae YH, Ko YJ, Chang WH, Lee JH, Lee KB, Park YJ, Ha HG, Kim YH. Effects of Robot-assisted Gait Training Combined with Functional Electrical Stimulation on Recovery of Locomotor Mobility in Chronic Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Phys Ther Sci. 2014 Dec;26(12):1949-53. doi: 10.1589/jpts.26.1949. Epub 2014 Dec 25.
Balami JS, Buchan AM. Complications of intracerebral haemorrhage. Lancet Neurol. 2012 Jan;11(1):101-18. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70264-2.
Bejot Y, Daubail B, Giroud M. Epidemiology of stroke and transient ischemic attacks: Current knowledge and perspectives. Rev Neurol (Paris). 2016 Jan;172(1):59-68. doi: 10.1016/j.neurol.2015.07.013. Epub 2015 Dec 21.
Blackburn M, van Vliet P, Mockett SP. Reliability of measurements obtained with the modified Ashworth scale in the lower extremities of people with stroke. Phys Ther. 2002 Jan;82(1):25-34. doi: 10.1093/ptj/82.1.25.
Bohannon RW, Andrews AW, Glenney SS. Minimal clinically important difference for comfortable speed as a measure of gait performance in patients undergoing inpatient rehabilitation after stroke. J Phys Ther Sci. 2013 Oct;25(10):1223-5. doi: 10.1589/jpts.25.1223. Epub 2013 Nov 20.
Bowden MG, Balasubramanian CK, Behrman AL, Kautz SA. Validation of a speed-based classification system using quantitative measures of walking performance poststroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008 Nov-Dec;22(6):672-5. doi: 10.1177/1545968308318837.
Chang WH, Kim YH. Robot-assisted Therapy in Stroke Rehabilitation. J Stroke. 2013 Sep;15(3):174-81. doi: 10.5853/jos.2013.15.3.174. Epub 2013 Sep 27.
Chollet F, Albucher JF. Strategies to augment recovery after stroke. Curr Treat Options Neurol. 2012 Dec;14(6):531-40. doi: 10.1007/s11940-012-0196-3.
Danzl MM, Chelette KC, Lee K, Lykins D, Sawaki L. Brain stimulation paired with novel locomotor training with robotic gait orthosis in chronic stroke: a feasibility study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2013;33(1):67-76. doi: 10.3233/NRE-130929.
Demeurisse G, Demol O, Robaye E. Motor evaluation in vascular hemiplegia. Eur Neurol. 1980;19(6):382-9. doi: 10.1159/000115178.
Dobkin BH. Clinical practice. Rehabilitation after stroke. N Engl J Med. 2005 Apr 21;352(16):1677-84. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp043511.
Fulk GD, Echternach JL. Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change of gait speed in individuals undergoing rehabilitation after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2008 Mar;32(1):8-13. doi: 10.1097/NPT0b013e31816593c0.
Hesse S, Uhlenbrock D, Werner C, Bardeleben A. A mechanized gait trainer for restoring gait in nonambulatory subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000 Sep;81(9):1158-61. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2000.6280.
Hesse S, Waldner A, Tomelleri C. Innovative gait robot for the repetitive practice of floor walking and stair climbing up and down in stroke patients. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010 Jun 28;7:30. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-7-30.
Hesse S, Schattat N, Mehrholz J, Werner C. Evidence of end-effector based gait machines in gait rehabilitation after CNS lesion. NeuroRehabilitation. 2013;33(1):77-84. doi: 10.3233/NRE-130930.
Hidler JM, Wall AE. Alterations in muscle activation patterns during robotic-assisted walking. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2005 Feb;20(2):184-93. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.09.016.
Hornby TG, Campbell DD, Kahn JH, Demott T, Moore JL, Roth HR. Enhanced gait-related improvements after therapist- versus robotic-assisted locomotor training in subjects with chronic stroke: a randomized controlled study. Stroke. 2008 Jun;39(6):1786-92. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.504779. Epub 2008 May 8.
Kelley CP, Childress J, Boake C, Noser EA. Over-ground and robotic-assisted locomotor training in adults with chronic stroke: a blinded randomized clinical trial. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2013 Mar;8(2):161-8. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2012.714052. Epub 2012 Sep 20.
Kolominsky-Rabas PL, Weber M, Gefeller O, Neundoerfer B, Heuschmann PU. Epidemiology of ischemic stroke subtypes according to TOAST criteria: incidence, recurrence, and long-term survival in ischemic stroke subtypes: a population-based study. Stroke. 2001 Dec 1;32(12):2735-40. doi: 10.1161/hs1201.100209.
Langhorne P, Bernhardt J, Kwakkel G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet. 2011 May 14;377(9778):1693-702. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60325-5.
Lee IW, Kim YN, Lee DK. Effect of a virtual reality exercise program accompanied by cognitive tasks on the balance and gait of stroke patients. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 Jul;27(7):2175-7. doi: 10.1589/jpts.27.2175. Epub 2015 Jul 22.
Mazzoleni S, Focacci A, Franceschini M, Waldner A, Spagnuolo C, Battini E, Bonaiuti D. Robot-assisted end-effector-based gait training in chronic stroke patients: A multicentric uncontrolled observational retrospective clinical study. NeuroRehabilitation. 2017;40(4):483-492. doi: 10.3233/NRE-161435.
Mehrholz J, Wagner K, Rutte K, Meissner D, Pohl M. Predictive validity and responsiveness of the functional ambulation category in hemiparetic patients after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Oct;88(10):1314-9. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.06.764.
Mehrholz J, Thomas S, Werner C, Kugler J, Pohl M, Elsner B. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 May 10;5(5):CD006185. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub4.
Moreland JD, Depaul VG, Dehueck AL, Pagliuso SA, Yip DW, Pollock BJ, Wilkins S. Needs assessment of individuals with stroke after discharge from hospital stratified by acute Functional Independence Measure score. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(26):2185-95. doi: 10.3109/09638280902951846.
Ochi M, Wada F, Saeki S, Hachisuka K. Gait training in subacute non-ambulatory stroke patients using a full weight-bearing gait-assistance robot: A prospective, randomized, open, blinded-endpoint trial. J Neurol Sci. 2015;353(1-2):130-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2015.04.033. Epub 2015 May 1.
Paolucci S, Bragoni M, Coiro P, De Angelis D, Fusco FR, Morelli D, Venturiero V, Pratesi L. Quantification of the probability of reaching mobility independence at discharge from a rehabilitation hospital in nonwalking early ischemic stroke patients: a multivariate study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2008;26(1):16-22. doi: 10.1159/000135648. Epub 2008 May 30.
Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke. 1995 Jun;26(6):982-9. doi: 10.1161/01.str.26.6.982.
Peurala SH, Tarkka IM, Pitkanen K, Sivenius J. The effectiveness of body weight-supported gait training and floor walking in patients with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Aug;86(8):1557-64. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.02.005.
Picelli A, Chemello E, Castellazzi P, Roncari L, Waldner A, Saltuari L, Smania N. Combined effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) on robot-assisted gait training in patients with chronic stroke: A pilot, double blind, randomized controlled trial. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2015;33(3):357-68. doi: 10.3233/RNN-140474.
Rand D, Eng JJ, Liu-Ambrose T, Tawashy AE. Feasibility of a 6-month exercise and recreation program to improve executive functioning and memory in individuals with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010 Oct;24(8):722-9. doi: 10.1177/1545968310368684. Epub 2010 May 11.
Rosa MC, Marques A, Demain S, Metcalf CD. Fast gait speed and self-perceived balance as valid predictors and discriminators of independent community walking at 6 months post-stroke--a preliminary study. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(2):129-34. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2014.911969. Epub 2014 Apr 23.
Sale P, Franceschini M, Waldner A, Hesse S. Use of the robot assisted gait therapy in rehabilitation of patients with stroke and spinal cord injury. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2012 Mar;48(1):111-21.
Schwartz I, Meiner Z. Robotic-assisted gait training in neurological patients: who may benefit? Ann Biomed Eng. 2015 May;43(5):1260-9. doi: 10.1007/s10439-015-1283-x. Epub 2015 Feb 28.
Shah S, Vanclay F, Cooper B. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42(8):703-9. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(89)90065-6.
Swinnen E, Baeyens JP, Knaepen K, Michielsen M, Hens G, Clijsen R, Goossens M, Buyl R, Meeusen R, Kerckhofs E. Walking with robot assistance: the influence of body weight support on the trunk and pelvis kinematics. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2015 May;10(3):252-7. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2014.888487. Epub 2014 Feb 11.
Taqi MA, Vora N, Callison RC, Lin R, Wolfe TJ. Past, present, and future of endovascular stroke therapies. Neurology. 2012 Sep 25;79(13 Suppl 1):S213-20. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31826959e5.
Taveggia G, Borboni A, Mule C, Villafane JH, Negrini S. Conflicting results of robot-assisted versus usual gait training during postacute rehabilitation of stroke patients: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Rehabil Res. 2016 Mar;39(1):29-35. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000137.
Thrift AG, Srikanth VK, Nelson MR, Kim J, Fitzgerald SM, Gerraty RP, Bladin CF, Phan TG, Cadilhac DA. Risk factor management in survivors of stroke: a double-blind, cluster-randomized, controlled trial. Int J Stroke. 2014 Jul;9(5):652-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00933.x. Epub 2012 Dec 11.
Tong RK, Ng MF, Li LS. Effectiveness of gait training using an electromechanical gait trainer, with and without functional electric stimulation, in subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Oct;87(10):1298-304. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.06.016.
Vahlberg B, Cederholm T, Lindmark B, Zetterberg L, Hellstrom K. Factors related to performance-based mobility and self-reported physical activity in individuals 1-3 years after stroke: a cross-sectional cohort study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013 Nov;22(8):e426-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.04.028. Epub 2013 May 28.
van de Port IG, Kwakkel G, Lindeman E. Community ambulation in patients with chronic stroke: how is it related to gait speed? J Rehabil Med. 2008 Jan;40(1):23-7. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0114.
van Hedel HJ, Wirz M, Dietz V. Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Feb;86(2):190-6. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.02.010.
Veerbeek JM, van Wegen E, van Peppen R, van der Wees PJ, Hendriks E, Rietberg M, Kwakkel G. What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 4;9(2):e87987. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087987. eCollection 2014.
Waldner A, Tomelleri C, Hesse S. Transfer of scientific concepts to clinical practice: recent robot-assisted training studies. Funct Neurol. 2009 Oct-Dec;24(4):173-7.
Zhang X, Yue Z, Wang J. Robotics in Lower-Limb Rehabilitation after Stroke. Behav Neurol. 2017;2017:3731802. doi: 10.1155/2017/3731802. Epub 2017 Jun 8.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
RP 19/17
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.