ArticleSpinal cord series and cases2019
A single-subject study of robotic upper limb training in the subacute phase for four persons with cervical spinal cord injury.
Article in Spinal cord series and cases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Robotic Therapy on the Self-Perception of Upper Limb Function in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Effects of Technology-Assisted Rehabilitation After Spinal Cord Injury: Pilot Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Article
- The Efficacity of the NeuroAssist Robotic System for Motor Rehabilitation of the Upper Limb-Promising Results from a Pilot Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The effectiveness of robotic-assisted upper limb rehabilitation to improve upper limb function in patients with cervical spinal cord injuries: a systematic literature review.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- What the study of spinal cord injured patients can tell us about the significance of the body in cognition.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study design: Single Objectives: To explore the impact of robotic training on upper limb function, activities of daily living (ADL) and training experience in subacute tetraplegic inpatients. Setting: Inpatient subacute Norwegian spinal cord injury (SCI) unit. Methods: Four participants (C4-7, AIS A-C) completed 11 sessions of robotic training using a passive robotic exoskeleton (Armeo Spring®). Descriptive statistics and visual analyses were used for comparing standard occupational therapy and robotic training. Outcome measures included the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM-III), the Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength Sensibility and Prehension (GRASSP), and a questionnaire. Results: All of the participants exhibited an increase in assessments of upper limb function (GRASSP-total) right side (0.4%-61.2%), and all except for one participant (-8%) showed an increase on their left side (20.9%-106.2%). Three out of four participants had improvements in ADL function SCIM-III (ranging from 5.6% to 46.7%). Results demonstrated improvements during the robotic intervention period in five out of 28 measurements. The participants enjoyed the exercise, and found it motivating and relevant to their injury (median ranged from 3.5 to 6.5 on a 0-7 scale). Conclusions: Three out of four participants improved upper limb function and ADL independence, but the study could not confirm that improvements were due to the robotic intervention. The participants enjoyed the robotic training and found it relevant to their injury.
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.