Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2020
A new lower limb portable exoskeleton for gait assistance in neurological patients: a proof of concept study.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 5 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Powered knee-assisting exoskeletons for gait rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis on clinical outcomes.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Pooled it
- Satisfaction analysis of overground gait exoskeletons in people with neurological pathology. a systematic review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Pooled it
- Control strategies used in lower limb exoskeletons for gait rehabilitation after brain injury: a systematic review and analysis of clinical effectiveness.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Pooled it
- Effects of control strategies on gait in robot-assisted post-stroke lower limb rehabilitation: a systematic review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022Pooled it
- Use of Robotic Devices for Gait Training in Patients Diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis: Current State of the Art.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Pooled it
- Low-cost Devices for Stroke Rehabilitation: A Review of Approaches, Designs, and Evidence.Restorative neurology and neuroscience · 2026Review
- Wearable Robots for Rehabilitation and Assistance of Gait: A Narrative Review.Annals of rehabilitation medicine · 2025Article
- Portable exoskeletons for upper limb rehabilitation: A systematic review.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Validating Questionnaires for Lower Limb Rehabilitation Systems and Devices: A Scoping Review.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Usability and Safety of the ATLAS 2030 Robotic Gait Device in Children with Cerebral Palsy and Spinal Muscular Atrophy.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A Study on the Design of Knee Exoskeleton Rehabilitation Based on the RFPBS Model.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- User-centered design of a personal-use exoskeleton: a clinical investigation on the feasibility and usability of the ABLE Exoskeleton device for individuals with spinal cord injury to perform skills for home and community environments.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- STELO: A New Modular Robotic Gait Device for Acquired Brain Injury-Exploring Its Usability.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Multicentric investigation on the safety, feasibility and usability of the ABLE lower-limb robotic exoskeleton for individuals with spinal cord injury: a framework towards the standardisation of clinical evaluations.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- A 3-DoF robotic platform for the rehabilitation and assessment of reaction time and balance skills of MS patients.PloS one · 2023Article
- Wearable Robotic Gait Training in Persons with Multiple Sclerosis: A Satisfaction Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Combining neural stimulation and a powered exoskeletal knee to enhance walking after stroke.Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFew portable exoskeletons following the assist-as-needed concept have been developed for patients with neurological disorders. Thus, the main objectives of this proof-of-concept study were 1) to explore the safety and feasibility of an exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation in stroke and multiple sclerosis patients, 2) to test different algorithms for gait assistance and measure the resulting gait changes and 3) to evaluate the user's perception of the device.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted. Five patients were recruited (4 patients with stroke and 1 with multiple sclerosis). A robotic, one-degree-of-freedom, portable lower limb exoskeleton known as the Marsi Active Knee (MAK) was designed. Three control modes (the Zero Force Control mode, Mode 1 and Mode 3) were implemented. Spatiotemporal gait parameters were measured by the 10-m walking test (10MWT), the Gait Assessment and Intervention Tool (G.A.I.T.) and Tinetti Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment (gait subscale) before and after the trials. A modified QUEST 2.0 questionnaire was administered to determine each participant's opinion about the exoskeleton. The data acquired by the MAK sensors were normalized to a gait cycle, and adverse effects were recorded.
resultsThe MAK exoskeleton was used successfully without any adverse effects. Better outcomes were obtained in the 10MWT and G.A.I.T. when Mode 3 was applied compared with not wearing the device at all. In 2 participants, Mode 3 worsened the results. Additionally, Mode 3 seemed to improve the 10MWT and G.A.I.T. outcomes to a greater extent than Mode 1. The overall score for the user perception of the device was 2.8 ± 0.4 95% CI.
conclusionsThe MAK exoskeleton seems to afford positive preliminary results regarding safety, feasibility, and user acceptance. The efficacy of the MAK should be studied in future studies, and more advanced improvements in safety must be implemented.
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.