Skip to main content
. 2016 Nov 29;3:2055668316676785. doi: 10.1177/2055668316676785

Table 2.

Characteristics of the included studies.

Study
Patients
Robotics
Intervention
Outcome measures
Author(s) Study design Quality score N Age in years (mean ± SD) Time poststroke in years (mean ± SD) Baseline velocity (m/s) Apparatus Body Weight Support (Y/N) Treadmill training (Y/N) Interaction with human body Study duration Follow-up Use of 10MWT, 6MWT and/or BBS Use of other outcome measures
Device-in-charge support
 Kelley et al. (2013) RCT 9 E: 11 C: 9 E: 66,9 ± 8,5 C:64,3 ± 10,9 E: 3,7 C: 1,4 E: 0,20 ± 0,10 C: 0,18 ± 0,12 Lokomat E: Y C: N E: Y C: N Exoskeleton 150 min/wk for 8 wk Total = 20 h 3 months 10MWT, 6MWT BI, FMA-L, SIS
 Hornby et al. (2008) RCT 7 E: 27 C: 21 E: 57 ± 10 C: 57 ± 11 E: 4,1 ± 4,2 C: 6,1 ± 7,3 E: 0,59 ± 0,3 C: 0,6 ± 0,33 Lokomat E: Y C: Y E: Y C: Y Exoskeleton 90 min/ wk for 4 wk Total = 6 h 6 months 6MWT, BBS FAI, SF36
 Westlake et al.  (2009) RCT 8 E: 8 C: 8 E: 58,6 ± 16,9 C: 55,1 ± 13,6 E: 3,7 ± 2,2 C: 3,1 ± 1,7 E: 0,87 ± 0,55 C: 0,72 ± 0,37 Lokomat E: Y C: Y E: Y C: Y Exoskeleton 90 min/wk for 4 wk Total = 6 h _ 6MWT,BBS SPPB, FMA-L, LLFDI
 Tanaka et al.  (2012) Cross-Over 7 E1: 7 E2: 5 E1: 63 ± 10 E2: 60 ± 8,5 E1: 4,6 ± 3,1 E2: 5,5 ± 5,6 E1: 0,75 ± 0,42 E2: 0,86 ± 0,16 Gait-Master4 E: N C: N E: N C: N End-Effector 40 min/wk for 6 wk Total = 4 h 1 month 10MWT TUG
 Dias et al. (2007) RCT 6 E: 20 C: 20 E: 70,4 ± 7,4 C: 68,0 ± 10,7 E: 3,9 ± 5,3 C: 4,0 ± 2,5 E: 0,42 ± 0,25 C: 0,53 ± 0,33 Gait Trainer (GT1) E: Y C: N E: N E: N End-Effector 216 min/wk for 5 wk Total = 18 h 3 months 10MWT, 6MWT TMS, RMI, FMA-L, MI
 Peurala et al.  (2005) RCT 6 E: 15 C: 15 E: 51,2 ± 7,9 C: 52,3 ± 6,8 E: 2,4 ± 2,6 C: 4,0 ± 5,8 E: 0,25 ± 0,28 C: 0,25 ± 0,39 Gait Trainer E: Y C: N E: N C: N End-Effector 100 min/wk for 3 wk Total = 5 h 6 months 10MWT, 6MWT MMAS, FIM
 De Luca et al.  (2013) Before/After 5 E: 6 E: 56,6 ± 13,2 E: 5,1 ± 2,7 E: 0,41 ± 0,04 G-EO System E: N E: N End-Effector 225 min/wk for 4 wks Total = 15 h _ 10MWT, 6MWT TUG
Patient-in-charge support
 Kawamoto et al.  (2013) Before/After 4 E: 15 E: 61 ± 14,8 E: 3.9 ± 3,1 E: 0,41 ± 0,26 HAL (Hybrid Assistive Limb) E: Y E: N Exoskeleton 50 min/wk for 8 wk Total = 6,6 h _ 10MWT, BBS TUG,
 Kubota et al.  (2013) Before/After 4 E: 9 E: 56,8 ± 15,9 E: 6,4 ± 6,3 E: 0.39 ± 0.37 HAL (Hybrid Assistive Limb) E: Y E: N Exoskeleton 40 min/wk for 8 wk Total = 5.3 h _ 10MWT,BBS TUG
 Stein et al. (2014) RCT 9 E: 12 C: 12 E: 57,6 ± 10,7 C: 56,6 ± 15,1 E: 4,1 ± 3,2 C: 7,4 ± 12,8 E: 0,44 ± 0,45 C: 0,36 ± 0,47 RLO (Robotic Leg Orthosis) E: N C: N E: N C: N Exoskeleton 150 min/wk for 6 wk Total = 15 h 1 month, 3 months 10MWT, BBS, 6MWT FTSTS, TUG, CAFE40, Romberg
 Wu et al. (2014) RCT* 6 E1: 14 E2: 14 E1: 53,6 ± 8,9 E2: 57,4 ± 9,8 E1: 7,3 ± 5,6 E2: 7,1 ± 6,0 E1: 0,65 ± 0,38 E2: 0,72 ± ,036 Cable-Driven Robotic Gait Trainer E: Y E: Y End-Effector 135 min/wk for 6 wk Total = 13.5 h 2 wk 10MWT, BBS, 6MWT MAS, ABC, SF-36

E: experimental group; C: control group; BI: Barthel Index; FMA-L: Fugl Meyer Assessment Lower Extremity; SIS: Stroke Impact Scale; FAI: Frenchay Activity Index; SF-36: Short Form 36; SPPB: Short Physical Performance Battery; LLFDI: Late Life Function and disability Instrument; TUG: Timed Up and Go Test; TMS: Toulouse Motor Scale; RMI: Rivermead Mobility Index; MI: Motricity Index; MMAS: Modified Motor Assessment Scale; FIM: Functional Independence Measure; FTSTS: Five Times Sit-to-Stand; Romberg: Romberg’s Test; CAFE40: California Functional Evaluation; MAS: Modified Ashworth Scale; ABC: Activities-specific Balance Confidence.

*

Two experimental groups were compared with each other in this study.