AUTHOR=Li Yongqiang , Fan Tao , Qi Qi , Wang Jun , Qiu Huaide , Zhang Lingye , Wu Xixi , Ye Jing , Chen Gong , Long Jianjun , Wang Yulong , Huang Guozhi , Li Jianan 

TITLE=Efficacy of a Novel Exoskeletal Robot for Locomotor Rehabilitation in Stroke Patients: A Multi-center, Non-inferiority, Randomized Controlled Trial

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience

VOLUME=Volume 13 - 2021

YEAR=2021

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnagi.2021.706569

DOI=10.3389/fnagi.2021.706569

ISSN=1663-4365

ABSTRACT=Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of a novel lower-limb exoskeletal robot, BEAR-H1 (Shenzhen Milebot Robot Technology), in the locomotor function of subacute stroke patients.
Methods: The present study was approved by the ethical committee of the first affiliated hospital of Nanjing medical university (No. 2019-MD-43), and registration was recorded on the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry with a unique identifier: ChiCTR2100044475. A total of 130 patients within six months of stroke were randomly divided into two groups: the robot group and the control group. The control group received routine training for walking, while in the robot group, BEAR-H1 lower-limb exoskeletal robot was used for locomotor training. Both groups received two sessions daily, five days a week for four weeks consecutively. Each session lasted 30 minutes. Before treatment, after treatment for 2 weeks, and 4 weeks, the patients were assessed based on the 6-minute walking test (6MWT), functional ambulation scale (FAC), Fugl-Meyer assessment lower-limb subscale (FMA-LE), and Vicon gait analysis.
Results: After a 4-week intervention, the results of 6MWT, FMA-LE, FAC, cadence, and gait cycle in the two groups significantly improved (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). The ratio of stance phase to that of swing phase, swing phase symmetry ratio (SPSR), and step length symmetry ratio (SLSR) were not significantly improved after four weeks of training in both the groups. Further analyses revealed that the robot group exhibited potential benefits, as the point estimates of 6MWT and △6MWT(post-pre) at four weeks were higher than those in the control group. Additionally, within-group comparison showed that patients in the robot group had a significant improvement in 6MWT earlier than their counterparts in the control group.  
Conclusions: The rehabilitation robot in this study could improve the locomotor function of stroke patients; however, its effect was no better than conventional locomotor training.