Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23152239›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Locomotor training for walking after spinal cord injury.

Jan Mehrholz, Joachim Kugler, Marcus Pohl

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 58 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04052009 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Effects of End-effector Based Training vs. Conventional Gait Training With Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury. A Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorRehab BaselRan2019 to 2020Enrolled36ConditionsIncomplete Spinal Cord InjuryArmsConventional gait training, End-effector based gait training, combined training (conventional and end-effector-based)
NCT06444672 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Effects of a Home-Based Rehabilitation on Anthropometric Measures, Sensory-Motor Functions and Independence After Spinal Cord Injury

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of MosulRan2021 to 2022Enrolled6ConditionsSpinal Cord Injury at T7-T10 Level, War Injuries Due to Bullets and Fragments, Spinal Cord Injury L1- L5, Spinal Cord Injury No Sensory/Motor in S4-S5ArmsHome-based Rehabilitation program, Knee-Ankle-Foot-Orthosis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 201 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jan MehrholzHead, Insitute of Science, Private European Medical Academy of the Klinik Bavaria Kreischa, Kreischa, Germany.jan.mehrholz@klinik-bavaria.de
Joachim Kugler
Marcus Pohl
Klinik Bavaria · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) is a lesion of neural elements of the spinal cord that can result in any degree of sensory and motor deficit, autonomic or bowel dysfunction. Improvement of locomotor function is one of the primary goals for people with SCI. Locomotor training for walking is therefore used in rehabilitation after SCI and might help to improve a person's ability to walk. However, a systematic review of the evidence is required to assess the effects and acceptability of locomotor training after SCI.

objectivesTo assess the effects of locomotor training on improvement in walking for people with traumatic SCI. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register (searched November 2011); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4); MEDLINE (Ovid) (1966 to November 2011); EMBASE (Ovid) (1980 to November 2011); CINAHL (1982 to November 2011); AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database) (1985 to November 2011); SPORTDiscus (1949 to November 2011); PEDro (the Physiotherapy Evidence database) (searched November 2011); COMPENDEX (engineering databases) (1972 to November 2011); and INSPEC (1969 to November 2011). We also searched the online trials databases Current Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com/isrctn) and Clinical Trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov). We handsearched relevant conference proceedings, checked reference lists of relevant published papers and contacted study authors in an effort to identify published, unpublished and ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people with SCI that compared locomotor training to a control of any other exercise or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcomes were the speed of walking and walking capacity at final follow-up. MAIN

resultsFive RCTs involving 309 people are included in this review. Overall, the results were inconclusive. There was no statistically significant superior effect of any locomotor training approach on walking function after SCI compared with any other kind of physical rehabilitation. The use of bodyweight supported treadmill training as locomotor training for people after SCI did not significantly increase walking velocity (0.03 m/sec with a 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.05 to 0.11; P = 0.52; I(2) = 22%) nor did it increase walking capacity (-1.3 metres (95% CI -41 to 40); P = 0.95; I(2) = 62%). However, in one study involving 74 people the group receiving robotic-assisted locomotor training had reduced walking capacity compared with people receiving any other intervention, a finding which needs further investigation. In all five studies there were no differences in adverse events or drop-outs between study groups. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence from RCTs to conclude that any one locomotor training strategy improves walking function more than another for people with SCI. The effects especially of robotic-assisted locomotor training are not clear, therefore research in the form of large RCTs, particularly for robotic training, is needed. Specific questions about which type of locomotor training might be most effective in improving walking function for people with SCI need to be explored.

Indexed as

LocomotionWalkingHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSpinal Cord Injuries

Identifiers

PMID23152239
PMCPMC11848707
OpenAlexW2004982351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.