Skip to main content
. 2013 Jul 25;2013(7):CD006185. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub3

Chang 2012

Methods RCT Method of randomisation: not stated Blinding of outcome assessors: not stated Adverse events: not stated by the authors Deaths: not stated by the authors Drop‐outs: 3 (2 in experimental group, 1 in control group) ITT analysis: not described
Participants Country: Republic of Korea 48 allocated participants (24 in treatment group, 24 in control group) 38 participants were non‐ambulatory at start of study Mean age: 58 years Inclusion criteria: first‐ever stroke, stroke onset within 1 month, supratentorial lesion, age > 20 years and < 65 years, not an independent ambulator (FAC < 2) and ability to cooperate during exercise testing Exclusion criteria: people who met criteria for absolute and relative contraindications to exercise testing established by the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) were excluded. Also, people who met contraindications for Lokomat therapy or musculoskeletal disease involving the lower limbs, such as severe painful arthritis, osteoporosis, or joint contracture and other neurological diseases, were also excluded
Interventions 2 arms:
  • Robotic gait trainer (Lokomat), 40 minutes per day, and 60 minutes conventional physiotherapy for 10 days

  • Conventional physiotherapy, same sessions of conventional gait training by physical therapist

Outcomes Outcomes were recorded at baseline and after training
  • FAC

  • Exercise and gas exchange capacity

  • Cardiopulmonary function

  • Fugl‐Meyer Assessment

  • Motricity Index

Notes This study describes the same study protocol and participants as described in the study Kim 2008 but provides some further explanations of participant characteristics; the ID Chang 2012 replaces therefore the ID Kim 2008
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Method of randomisation is unclear
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Method of concealment is unclear
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes High risk No
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Unclear