Ann Rehabil Med.  2017 Feb;41(1):34-41. 10.5535/arm.2017.41.1.34.

Improved Gait Speed After Robot-Assisted Gait Training in Patients With Motor Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury: A Preliminary Study

• Hwang S
• Kim HR
• Han ZA
• Lee BS
• Kim S
• Shin H
• Moon JG
• Yang SP
• Lim MH
• Cho DY
• Kim H
• Lee HJ

• KMID: 2383675
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2017.41.1.34

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the clinical features that could serve as predictive factors for improvement in gait speed after robotic treatment.
METHODS
A total of 29 patients with motor incomplete spinal cord injury received 4-week robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) on the Lokomat (Hocoma AG, Volketswil, Switzerland) for 30 minutes, once a day, 5 times a week, for a total of 20 sessions. All subjects were evaluated for general characteristics, the 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT), the Lower Extremity Motor Score (LEMS), the Functional Ambulatory Category (FAC), the Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury version II (WISCI-II), the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and the Spinal Cord Independence Measure version III (SCIM-III) every 0, and 4 weeks. After all the interventions, subjects were stratified using the 10MWT score at 4 weeks into improved group and non-improved group for statistical analysis.
RESULTS
The improved group had younger age and shorter disease duration than the non-improved group. All subjects with the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale level C (AIS-C) tetraplegia belonged to the non-improved group, while most subjects with AIS-C paraplegia, AIS-D tetraplegia, and AIS-D paraplegia belonged to the improved group. The improved group showed greater baseline lower extremity strength, balance, and daily living function than the non-improved group.
CONCLUSION
Assessment of SCIM-III, BBS, and trunk control, in addition to LEMS, have potential for predicting the effects of robotic treatment in patients with motor incomplete spinal cord injury.

Keyword

Spinal cord injuries; Locomotion; Robotics; Rehabilitation; Clinical trial

MeSH Terms

Gait*
Humans
Locomotion
Lower Extremity
Paraplegia
Quadriplegia
Rehabilitation
Robotics
Spinal Cord Injuries*
Spinal Cord*
Spinal Injuries
Walking

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Between March 2013 and February 2015, a total of 82 patients with subacute iSCI (incomplete spinal cord injury) were screened, of which 32 were eligible for the study. Three dropped out after initiation of the study: one subject voluntarily quit the study, another due to poor health not associated with robot-assisted gait training, and the other due to loss of contact. A total 29 subjects were finally included and divided into improved (n=18) and non-improved groups (n=11). 10MWT, 10-Meter Walk Test.

Reference

1. McKinley WO, Jackson AB, Cardenas DD, DeVivo MJ. Long-term medical complications after traumatic spinal cord injury: a regional model systems analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999; 80:1402–1410. PMID: 10569434.

2. Ditunno JF Jr, Burns AS, Marino RJ. Neurological and functional capacity outcome measures: essential to spinal cord injury clinical trials. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005; 42:35–41.

3. Finch L, Barbeau H, Arsenault B. Influence of body weight support on normal human gait: development of a gait retraining strategy. Phys Ther. 1991; 71:842–855. PMID: 1946621.

4. Visintin M, Barbeau H, Korner-Bitensky N, Mayo NE. A new approach to retrain gait in stroke patients through body weight support and treadmill stimulation. Stroke. 1998; 29:1122–1128. PMID: 9626282.

5. Schwartz I, Sajina A, Neeb M, Fisher I, Katz-Luerer M, Meiner Z. Locomotor training using a robotic device in patients with subacute spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2011; 49:1062–1067. PMID: 21625239.

6. Jezernik S, Colombo G, Keller T, Frueh H, Morari M. Robotic orthosis lokomat : a rehabilitation and research tool. Neuromodulation. 2003; 6:108–115. PMID: 22150969.

7. Hornby TG, Zemon DH, Campbell D. Robotic-assisted, body-weight-supported treadmill training in individuals following motor incomplete spinal cord injury. Phys Ther. 2005; 85:52–66. PMID: 15623362.

8. Alcobendas-Maestro M, Esclarin-Ruz A, Casado-Lopez RM, Munoz-Gonzalez A, Perez-Mateos G, Gonzalez-Valdizan E, et al. Lokomat robotic-assisted versus overground training within 3 to 6 months of incomplete spinal cord lesion: randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012; 26:1058–1063. PMID: 22699827.

9. Shin JC, Kim JY, Park HK, Kim NY. Effect of robotic-assisted gait training in patients with incomplete spinal cord injury. Ann Rehabil Med. 2014; 38:719–725. PMID: 25566469.

10. Waters RL, Adkins R, Yakura J, Vigil D. Prediction of ambulatory performance based on motor scores derived from standards of the American Spinal Injury Association. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994; 75:756–760. PMID: 8024420.

11. Zörner B, Blanckenhorn WU, Dietz V, Curt A. EM-SCI Study Group. Clinical algorithm for improved prediction of ambulation and patient stratification after incomplete spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma. 2010; 27:241–252. PMID: 19645527.

12. Curt A, Dietz V. Ambulatory capacity in spinal cord injury: significance of somatosensory evoked potentials and ASIA protocol in predicting outcome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997; 78:39–43. PMID: 9014955.

13. Wirz M, van Hedel HJ, Rupp R, Curt A, Dietz V. Muscle force and gait performance: relationships after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006; 87:1218–1222. PMID: 16935058.

14. Shin JC, Yoo JH, Jung TH, Goo HR. Comparison of lower extremity motor score parameters for patients with motor incomplete spinal cord injury using gait parameters. Spinal Cord. 2011; 49:529–533. PMID: 21102574.

15. Kirshblum SC, Burns SP, Biering-Sorensen F, Donovan W, Graves DE, Jha A, et al. International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury (revised 2011). J Spinal Cord Med. 2011; 34:535–546. PMID: 22330108.

16. Lam T, Noonan VK, Eng JJ. SCIRE Research Team. A systematic review of functional ambulation outcome measures in spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2008; 46:246–254. PMID: 17923844.

17. Holden MK, Gill KM, Magliozzi MR. Gait assessment for neurologically impaired patients. Standards for outcome assessment. Phys Ther. 1986; 66:1530–1539. PMID: 3763704.

18. Dittuno PL, Ditunno JF Jr. Walking index for spinal cord injury (WISCI II): scale revision. Spinal Cord. 2001; 39:654–656. PMID: 11781863.

19. Berg KO, Wood-Dauphinee SL, Williams JI, Maki B. Measuring balance in the elderly: validation of an instrument. Can J Public Health. 1992; 83(Suppl 2):S7–S11. PMID: 1468055.

20. Catz A, Itzkovich M, Tesio L, Biering-Sorensen F, Weeks C, Laramee MT, et al. A multicenter international study on the Spinal Cord Independence Measure, version III: Rasch psychometric validation. Spinal Cord. 2007; 45:275–291. PMID: 16909143.

21. Braddom RL. Physical medicine and rehabilitation. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier/Saunders;2010. p. 408–409.

22. van Hedel HJ, Wirz M, Dietz V. Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005; 86:190–196. PMID: 15706542.

23. Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991; 39:142–148. PMID: 1991946.

24. Graham JE, Ostir GV, Fisher SR, Ottenbacher KJ. Assessing walking speed in clinical research: a systematic review. J Eval Clin Pract. 2008; 14:552–562. PMID: 18462283.

25. Lemay JF, Nadeau S. Standing balance assessment in ASIA D paraplegic and tetraplegic participants: concurrent validity of the Berg Balance Scale. Spinal Cord. 2010; 48:245–250. PMID: 19773797.

26. Geisler FH, Dorsey FC, Coleman WP. Recovery of motor function after spinal-cord injury: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with GM-1 ganglioside. N Engl J Med. 1991; 324:1829–1838. PMID: 2041549.

27. Burns SP, Golding DG, Rolle WA Jr, Graziani V, Ditunno JF Jr. Recovery of ambulation in motorincomplete tetraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997; 78:1169–1172. PMID: 9365343.

28. Scivoletto G, Morganti B, Ditunno P, Ditunno JF, Molinari M. Effects on age on spinal cord lesion patients’ rehabilitation. Spinal Cord. 2003; 41:457–464. PMID: 12883544.

29. Scivoletto G, Tamburella F, Laurenza L, Torre M, Molinari M. Who is going to walk? A review of the factors influencing walking recovery after spinal cord injury. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014; 8:141. PMID: 24659962.

30. Piepmeier JM, Jenkins NR. Late neurological changes following traumatic spinal cord injury. J Neurosurg. 1988; 69:399–402. PMID: 3404238.

31. Campagnolo DI, Kirshblum S, Nash MS, Heary RF, Gorman PH. Spinal cord medicine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins;2011. p. 123–124.

32. Scivoletto G, Romanelli A, Mariotti A, Marinucci D, Tamburella F, Mammone A, et al. Clinical factors that affect walking level and performance in chronic spinal cord lesion patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008; 33:259–264. PMID: 18303457.

33. Lemay JF, Duclos C, Nadeau S, Gagnon D, Desrosiers E. Postural and dynamic balance while walking in adults with incomplete spinal cord injury. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2014; 24:739–746. PMID: 24909105.

34. Chen CL, Yeung KT, Bih LI, Wang CH, Chen MI, Chien JC. The relationship between sitting stability and functional performance in patients with paraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003; 84:1276–1281. PMID: 13680561.

35. Morganti B, Scivoletto G, Ditunno P, Ditunno JF, Molinari M. Walking index for spinal cord injury (WISCI): criterion validation. Spinal Cord. 2005; 43:27–33. PMID: 15520841.