Trial reportPloS one2016
Robot-Assisted End-Effector-Based Stair Climbing for Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing: Feasibility, Reliability, and Repeatability.
Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feedback control of heart rate during robotics-assisted tilt table exercise in patients after stroke: a clinical feasibility study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Robot-Assisted Stair Climbing Training on Postural Control and Sensory Integration Processes in Chronic Post-stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeurological impairments can limit the implementation of conventional cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and cardiovascular training strategies. A promising approach to provoke cardiovascular stress while facilitating task-specific exercise in people with disabilities is feedback-controlled robot-assisted end-effector-based stair climbing (RASC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, reliability, and repeatability of augmented RASC-based CPET in able-bodied subjects, with a view towards future research and applications in neurologically impaired populations.
methodsTwenty able-bodied subjects performed a familiarisation session and 2 consecutive incremental CPETs using augmented RASC. Outcome measures focussed on standard cardiopulmonary performance parameters and on accuracy of work rate tracking (RMSEP-root mean square error). Criteria for feasibility were cardiopulmonary responsiveness and technical implementation. Relative and absolute test-retest reliability were assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of the measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). Mean differences, limits of agreement, and coefficients of variation (CoV) were estimated to assess repeatability.
resultsAll criteria for feasibility were achieved. Mean V'O2peak was 106±9% of predicted V'O2max and mean HRpeak was 99±3% of predicted HRmax. 95% of the subjects achieved at least 1 criterion for V'O2max, and the detection of the sub-maximal ventilatory thresholds was successful (ventilatory anaerobic threshold 100%, respiratory compensation point 90% of the subjects). Excellent reliability was found for peak cardiopulmonary outcome measures (ICC ≥ 0.890, SEM ≤ 0.60%, MDC ≤ 1.67%). Repeatability for the primary outcomes was good (CoV ≤ 0.12).
conclusionsRASC-based CPET with feedback-guided exercise intensity demonstrated comparable or higher peak cardiopulmonary performance variables relative to predicted values, achieved the criteria for V'O2max, and allowed determination of sub-maximal ventilatory thresholds. The reliability and repeatability were found to be high. There is potential for augmented RASC to be used for exercise testing and prescription in populations with neurological impairments who would benefit from repetitive task-specific training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.