Objective: To compare Robotic Body Weight Supported Treadmill Training (RBWSTT), Overground Robotic Exoskeleton Training (ORET), and Conventional Physiotherapy (CP) on gait and cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) eligible for walking recovery training and stratified by injury level, severity and onset (subacute: early post-spinal shock phase until 12 months; chronic: >12 months). Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023462361) and conducted following PRISMA-NMA guidelines. Eligible studies compared gait or cardiovascular recovery after RBWSTT or ORET. Searches were performed in MedLine, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science until May 2025. Cochrane RoB2 tool assessed the risk of bias. Meta-analysis synthesized the data. Results: Twenty-five RCTs (n=905) were included. In subacute SCI, RBWSTT significantly improved the 6-Minute Walking Test (+43 m), Lower Extremity Motor Score (+4.94), and Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury II (+1.55) compared with CP. In chronic SCI, ORET improved the Lower Extremity Motor Score (+2.77) and aerobic efficiency. RBWSTT showed better tolerability. Evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. Conclusion: RBWSTT seems more effective in subacute SCI; ORET may benefit chronic cases. These results support individualized robotic rehabilitation. Stronger evidence is needed for long-term effects.

“Comparison Between Robotic and Conventional Walking Recovery Training Methods in People With Spinal Cord Injury” Systematic Review with Pairwise and Network meta-analysis

De Maio, Giuliana
Primo
;
Conte, Daniele
Secondo
;
Catelan, Dolores;Bizzarini, Emiliana
Ultimo
2026-01-01

Abstract

Objective: To compare Robotic Body Weight Supported Treadmill Training (RBWSTT), Overground Robotic Exoskeleton Training (ORET), and Conventional Physiotherapy (CP) on gait and cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) eligible for walking recovery training and stratified by injury level, severity and onset (subacute: early post-spinal shock phase until 12 months; chronic: >12 months). Design: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023462361) and conducted following PRISMA-NMA guidelines. Eligible studies compared gait or cardiovascular recovery after RBWSTT or ORET. Searches were performed in MedLine, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science until May 2025. Cochrane RoB2 tool assessed the risk of bias. Meta-analysis synthesized the data. Results: Twenty-five RCTs (n=905) were included. In subacute SCI, RBWSTT significantly improved the 6-Minute Walking Test (+43 m), Lower Extremity Motor Score (+4.94), and Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury II (+1.55) compared with CP. In chronic SCI, ORET improved the Lower Extremity Motor Score (+2.77) and aerobic efficiency. RBWSTT showed better tolerability. Evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. Conclusion: RBWSTT seems more effective in subacute SCI; ORET may benefit chronic cases. These results support individualized robotic rehabilitation. Stronger evidence is needed for long-term effects.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
_comparison_between_robotic_and_conventional.990.pdf

embargo fino al 18/06/2027

Tipologia: Documento in Post-print
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 2.61 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.61 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11390/1333124
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact