↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of robot-assisted gait training in children with cerebral palsy: a bicenter, pragmatic, randomized, cross-over trial (PeLoGAIT)

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
387 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness of robot-assisted gait training in children with cerebral palsy: a bicenter, pragmatic, randomized, cross-over trial (PeLoGAIT)
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12887-017-0815-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Ammann-Reiffer, C.H.G. Bastiaenen, A.D. Meyer-Heim, H.J.A. van Hedel

Abstract

Walking ability is a priority for many children with cerebral palsy (CP) and their parents when considering domains of importance regarding treatment interventions. Partial body-weight supported treadmill training has become an established therapeutic treatment approach to address this demand. Further, new robotic rehabilitation technologies have increasingly been implemented in the clinical setting to allow for longer training sessions with increased step repetitions while maintaining a consistent movement pattern. But the current evidence about its clinical effectiveness in pediatric rehabilitation is weak. The aim of this research project is therefore to investigate the effectiveness of robot-assisted gait training on improvements of functional gait parameters in children with cerebral palsy. Children aged 6 to 18 years with bilateral spastic cerebral palsy who are able to walk at least 14 m with or without walking aids will be recruited in two pediatric therapy centers in Switzerland. Within a pragmatic cross-over design with randomized treatment sequences, they perform 5 weeks of robot-assisted gait training (three times per week with a maximum of 45 min walking time each) or a 5-week period of standard treatment, which is individually customized to the needs of the child and usually consists of 1-2 sessions of physiotherapy per week and additional hippotherapy, circuit training as well as occupational therapy as necessary. Both interventions take place in an outpatient setting. The percentage score of the dimension E of the Gross Motor Function Measure-88 (GMFM-88) as primary outcome as well as the dimension D of the GMFM-88, 6-minute and 10-meter walking tests as secondary outcomes are assessed before and at the end of each intervention period. Additionally, a 5-week follow-up assessment is scheduled for the children who are assigned to the standard treatment first. Treatment effects, period effects as well as follow-up effects are analyzed with paired analyses and independent test statistics are used to assess carry-over effects. Although robot-assisted gait training has become an established treatment option to address gait impairments, evidence for its effectiveness is vague. This pragmatic trial will provide important information on its effects under clinical outpatient conditions. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00887848 . Registered 23 April 2009.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 387 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 386 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 57 15%
Student > Master 47 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 6%
Researcher 19 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 5%
Other 49 13%
Unknown 172 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 75 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 60 16%
Sports and Recreations 13 3%
Engineering 12 3%
Social Sciences 8 2%
Other 30 8%
Unknown 189 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 December 2017.
All research outputs
#20,456,235
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#2,627
of 3,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,784
of 310,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#49
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,036 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,786 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.