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
8 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-11-27
2020-04-21
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.
Robot-Assisted Training Versus Standard Training in Ischemic Stroke
NCT06273475
Clinical Feasibility of ROBERT-SAS in Severely Impaired Stroke Patients
NCT05421910
ROBot Assisted Physical Training of Older Patients During acUte hospitaliSaTion
NCT05782855
Assessment of Robotic Assistance on Gait Parameters Among Healthy Subjects and Brain Damaged Patients
NCT05264103
Pilot Study - Comparison of Upper Body Ergometer Vs. Robot in Upper Extremity Motor Recovery Post-Stroke
NCT00343304
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
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.
NON_RANDOMIZED
SINGLE_GROUP
DEVICE_FEASIBILITY
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Training with ROBERT® Passive
Training performed with ROBERT® in passive mode, resulting in active assistive training.
ROBERT®
Robotic Rehabilitation intervention ROBERT®, designed for early, and supplementary therapy of patients.
Training with ROBERT® Active
Traning performed with ROBERT® in Active mode, resulting in active resistive training.
ROBERT®
Robotic Rehabilitation intervention ROBERT®, designed for early, and supplementary therapy of patients.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
ROBERT®
Robotic Rehabilitation intervention ROBERT®, designed for early, and supplementary therapy of patients.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* 18 years or older.
* Can read, understand and speak Danish
* Reduced motor function in lower extremities.
Exclusion Criteria
* Cannot read, understand or speak Danish
* Patients with unstable fractures in columna, pelvis or lower extremities.
* Patients with the risk of ulcers, or with exceedingly sensitive skin.
* The patient is refusing to train with ROBERT®
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Lifescience-Robotics
INDUSTRY
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.
Helle Rovsing Jørgensen, Therapist
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Neuro Unit Nord, Denmark
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Region Hospital, Neuro Unit Nord.
Frederikshavn, North Denmark, Denmark
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.
Wunsch H, Guerra C, Barnato AE, Angus DC, Li G, Linde-Zwirble WT. Three-year outcomes for Medicare beneficiaries who survive intensive care. JAMA. 2010 Mar 3;303(9):849-56. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.216.
Needham DM, Davidson J, Cohen H, Hopkins RO, Weinert C, Wunsch H, Zawistowski C, Bemis-Dougherty A, Berney SC, Bienvenu OJ, Brady SL, Brodsky MB, Denehy L, Elliott D, Flatley C, Harabin AL, Jones C, Louis D, Meltzer W, Muldoon SR, Palmer JB, Perme C, Robinson M, Schmidt DM, Scruth E, Spill GR, Storey CP, Render M, Votto J, Harvey MA. Improving long-term outcomes after discharge from intensive care unit: report from a stakeholders' conference. Crit Care Med. 2012 Feb;40(2):502-9. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318232da75.
I. Com, Global strategy and action plan on ageing and health. 2017.
"NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS public health challenges WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data," 2006.
Wist S, Clivaz J, Sattelmayer M. Muscle strengthening for hemiparesis after stroke: A meta-analysis. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2016 Apr;59(2):114-24. doi: 10.1016/j.rehab.2016.02.001. Epub 2016 Mar 8.
English C, Bernhardt J, Crotty M, Esterman A, Segal L, Hillier S. Circuit class therapy or seven-day week therapy for increasing rehabilitation intensity of therapy after stroke (CIRCIT): a randomized controlled trial. Int J Stroke. 2015 Jun;10(4):594-602. doi: 10.1111/ijs.12470. Epub 2015 Mar 19.
Sarkies MN, White J, Henderson K, Haas R, Bowles J; Evidence Translation in Allied Health (EviTAH) Group. Additional weekend allied health services reduce length of stay in subacute rehabilitation wards but their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are unclear in acute general medical and surgical hospital wards: a systematic review. J Physiother. 2018 Jul;64(3):142-158. doi: 10.1016/j.jphys.2018.05.004. Epub 2018 Jun 19.
Peiris CL, Taylor NF, Shields N. Extra physical therapy reduces patient length of stay and improves functional outcomes and quality of life in people with acute or subacute conditions: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011 Sep;92(9):1490-500. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.04.005.
Peiris CL, Shields N, Brusco NK, Watts JJ, Taylor NF. Additional Physical Therapy Services Reduce Length of Stay and Improve Health Outcomes in People With Acute and Subacute Conditions: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Nov;99(11):2299-2312. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2018.03.005. Epub 2018 Apr 7.
Lohse KR, Lang CE, Boyd LA. Is more better? Using metadata to explore dose-response relationships in stroke rehabilitation. Stroke. 2014 Jul;45(7):2053-8. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.004695. Epub 2014 May 27.
Lang CE, Lohse KR, Birkenmeier RL. Dose and timing in neurorehabilitation: prescribing motor therapy after stroke. Curr Opin Neurol. 2015 Dec;28(6):549-55. doi: 10.1097/WCO.0000000000000256.
"Ét sikkert og sammenhaengende sundhedsnetvaerk for alle."
Masiero S, Poli P, Rosati G, Zanotto D, Iosa M, Paolucci S, Morone G. The value of robotic systems in stroke rehabilitation. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2014 Mar;11(2):187-98. doi: 10.1586/17434440.2014.882766. Epub 2014 Jan 30.
Semprini M, Laffranchi M, Sanguineti V, Avanzino L, De Icco R, De Michieli L, Chiappalone M. Technological Approaches for Neurorehabilitation: From Robotic Devices to Brain Stimulation and Beyond. Front Neurol. 2018 Apr 9;9:212. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00212. eCollection 2018.
Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol. 2009 Aug;8(8):741-54. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70150-4.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
N-20190038
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.