Skip to main content
. 2015 Nov 5;56(1):33–37. doi: 10.2176/nmc.oa.2015-0178

Table 2.

Comparison of “with hybrid assistive limb (HAL) suitability” and “without HAL suitability

Groups With HAL suitability (n = 10) Without HAL suitability (n = 5) P
Age 12–70 (43.7) 15–83 (57.6) 0.2639
Sex (M:F) 4:6 3:2 0.4642
Height (cm) 150–178.4 (162.7) 139.3–165.8 (156.4) 0.2449
Weight (kg) 29–76 (52.4) 44–74.2 (56.76) 0.5405
Interval until HAL intervention (days) 2–57 (20.1) 5–21 (13.6) 0.3392
Number of HAL training sessions 3–14 [7] 2–11 [6] 0.5837
Brs before HAL training: lower limb 1–6 [4] 2–4 [3] 0.5731
FMA 66–221 [210] 94–184 [133] 0.233
Total SIAS 16–68 [61] 14–49 [38] 0.2414
  SIAS: lower limb 7–29 [22] 9–24 [16] 0.3875
  SIAS: pain 3 [3] 0–3 [2] 0.0122 *
  SIAS: visuospatial perception 2–3 [3] 2–3 [2] 0.0277 *
Total FIM 23–124 [98] 24–95 [60] 0.3782
  FIM: motor function 16–89 [63] 14–70 [35] 0.3782
  FIM: cognitive function 7–35 [35] 10–28 [25] 0.036 *

(): mean, []: median,

*: Chi-squared test, P < 0.05, Brs: Brunnstrom stage, F: female, FIM: functional independence measure, FMA: Fugl-Meyer assessment, HAL: hybrid assistive limb, M: male, SIAS: stroke impairment assessment set.