↓ Skip to main content

Robot-assisted gait training (Lokomat) improves walking function and activity in people with spinal cord injury: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
188 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
489 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
Robot-assisted gait training (Lokomat) improves walking function and activity in people with spinal cord injury: a systematic review
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12984-017-0232-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ki Yeun Nam, Hyun Jung Kim, Bum Sun Kwon, Jin-Woo Park, Ho Jun Lee, Aeri Yoo

Abstract

Robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) after spinal cord injury (SCI) induces several different neurophysiological mechanisms to restore walking ability, including the activation of central pattern generators, task-specific stepping practice and massed exercise. However, there is no clear evidence for the optimal timing and efficacy of RAGT in people with SCI. The aim of our study was to assess the effects of RAGT on improvement in walking-related functional outcomes in patients with incomplete SCI compared with other rehabilitation modalities according to time elapsed since injury. This review included 10 trials involving 502 participants to meta-analysis. The acute RAGT groups showed significantly greater improvements in gait distance, leg strength, and functional level of mobility and independence than the over-ground training (OGT) groups. The pooled mean difference was 45.05 m (95% CI 13.81 to 76.29, P = 0.005, I(2) = 0%; two trials, 122 participants), 2.54 (LEMS, 95% CI 0.11 to 4.96, P = 0.04, I(2) = 0%; three trials, 211 participants) and 0.5 (WISCI-II and FIM-L, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.98, P = 0.04, I(2) = 67%; three trials, 211 participants), respectively. In the chronic RAGT group, significantly greater improvements in speed (pooled mean difference = 0.07 m/s, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.12, P = 0.01, I(2) = 0%; three trials, 124 participants) and balance measured by TUG (pooled mean difference = 9.25, 95% CI 2.76 to 15.73, P = 0.005, I(2) = 74%; three trials, 120 participants) were observed than in the group with no intervention. Thus, RAGT improves mobility-related outcomes to a greater degree than conventional OGT for patients with incomplete SCI, particularly during the acute stage. RAGT treatment is a promising technique to restore functional walking and improve locomotor ability, which might enable SCI patients to maintain a healthy lifestyle and increase their level of physical activity. PROSPERO (CRD 42016037366 ). Registered 6 April 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users 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 489 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 489 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 86 18%
Student > Master 74 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 9%
Researcher 41 8%
Student > Postgraduate 23 5%
Other 74 15%
Unknown 149 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 79 16%
Engineering 77 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 76 16%
Neuroscience 30 6%
Sports and Recreations 16 3%
Other 50 10%
Unknown 161 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 05 October 2021.
All research outputs
#2,615,307
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#125
of 1,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,612
of 309,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#1
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
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 309,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.