Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2016
Technology-assisted stroke rehabilitation in Mexico: a pilot randomized trial comparing traditional therapy to circuit training in a Robot/technology-assisted therapy gym.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for lower limb motor impairment in post-stroke hemiplegia: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Post-stroke lower limb rehabilitation: a comparative study between exoskeleton robots and traditional gait training.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- The effect of lower limb rehabilitation robot on lower limb -motor function in stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of robot-assisted training for lower limb rehabilitation on lower limb function in stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Pooled it
- Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Circuit class therapy for improving mobility after stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- The Effect of Using a Rehabilitation Robot for Patients with Post-Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Fatigue Syndrome.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Trial
- Application of an EMG-Rehabilitation Robot in Patients with Post-Coronavirus Fatigue Syndrome (COVID-19)-A Feasibility Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Adaptive Control of Lower-Limb Assistive Exoskeleton for Rehabilitation Using Deep Reinforcement Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Implementing Rehabilitation Robotics in Routine Care: A Mapping Review of Service Delivery Models, Implementation Determinants, Strategies, and Real-World Outcomes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Low-cost Devices for Stroke Rehabilitation: A Review of Approaches, Designs, and Evidence.Restorative neurology and neuroscience · 2026Review
- Recent research on rehabilitation interventions for post-stroke gait and balance in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Article
- Economic analysis of digital motor rehabilitation technologies: a systematic review.Health economics review · 2024Review
- Economic Cost of Rehabilitation with Robotic and Virtual Reality Systems in People with Neurological Disorders: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A Real-Time Control Method for Upper Limb Exoskeleton Based on Active Torque Prediction Model.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A bidirectional fabric-based soft robotic glove for hand function assistance in patients with chronic stroke.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Automated patient-robot assignment for a robotic rehabilitation gym: a simplified simulation model.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Effects of robot-assisted task-oriented upper limb motor training on neuroplasticity in stroke patients with different degrees of motor dysfunction: A neuroimaging motor evaluation index.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Economic Evaluation in Neurological Physiotherapy: A Systematic Review.Brain sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStroke rehabilitation in low- and middle-income countries, such as Mexico, is often hampered by lack of clinical resources and funding. To provide a cost-effective solution for comprehensive post-stroke rehabilitation that can alleviate the need for one-on-one physical or occupational therapy, in lower and upper extremities, we proposed and implemented a technology-assisted rehabilitation gymnasium in Chihuahua, Mexico. The Gymnasium for Robotic Rehabilitation (Robot Gym) consisted of low- and high-tech systems for upper and lower limb rehabilitation. Our hypothesis is that the Robot Gym can provide a cost- and labor-efficient alternative for post-stroke rehabilitation, while being more or as effective as traditional physical and occupational therapy approaches.
methodsA typical group of stroke patients was randomly allocated to an intervention (n = 10) or a control group (n = 10). The intervention group received rehabilitation using the devices in the Robot Gym, whereas the control group (n = 10) received time-matched standard care. All of the study subjects were subjected to 24 two-hour therapy sessions over a period of 6 to 8 weeks. Several clinical assessments tests for upper and lower extremities were used to evaluate motor function pre- and post-intervention. A cost analysis was done to compare the cost effectiveness for both therapies.
resultsNo significant differences were observed when comparing the results of the pre-intervention Mini-mental, Brunnstrom Test, and Geriatric Depression Scale Test, showing that both groups were functionally similar prior to the intervention. Although, both training groups were functionally equivalent, they had a significant age difference. The results of all of the upper extremity tests showed an improvement in function in both groups with no statistically significant differences between the groups. The Fugl-Meyer and the 10 Meters Walk lower extremity tests showed greater improvement in the intervention group compared to the control group. On the Time Up and Go Test, no statistically significant differences were observed pre- and post-intervention when comparing the control and the intervention groups. For the 6 Minute Walk Test, both groups presented a statistically significant difference pre- and post-intervention, showing progress in their performance. The robot gym therapy was more cost-effective than the traditional one-to-one therapy used during this study in that it enabled therapist to train up to 1.5 to 6 times more patients for the approximately same cost in the long term.
conclusionsThe results of this study showed that the patients that received therapy using the Robot Gym had enhanced functionality in the upper extremity tests similar to patients in the control group. In the lower extremity tests, the intervention patients showed more improvement than those subjected to traditional therapy. These results support that the Robot Gym can be as effective as traditional therapy for stroke patients, presenting a more cost- and labor-efficient option for countries with scarce clinical resources and funding.
trial registrationISRCTN98578807 .
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.