Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35447689›Full record

ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Effectiveness of Platform-Based Robot-Assisted Rehabilitation for Musculoskeletal or Neurologic Injuries: A Systematic Review.

Anil Babu Payedimarri, Matteo Ratti, Riccardo Rescinito, Kris Vanhaecht, Massimiliano Panella

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Enhanced Rehabilitation Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Gait Training with EksoNR Lower Extremity Exoskeleton in 19 Stroke Patients.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anil Babu PayedimarriDepartment of Translational Medicine (DIMET), Università del Piemonte Orientale, 28100 Novara, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4298-1305
Matteo RattiDepartment of Translational Medicine (DIMET), Università del Piemonte Orientale, 28100 Novara, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9273-9114
Riccardo RescinitoDepartment of Translational Medicine (DIMET), Università del Piemonte Orientale, 28100 Novara, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0117-3432
Kris VanhaechtDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leuven Institute for Healthcare Policy, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Massimiliano PanellaDepartment of Translational Medicine (DIMET), Università del Piemonte Orientale, 28100 Novara, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the last ten years the use of robotic-assisted rehabilitation has increased significantly. Compared with traditional care, robotic rehabilitation has several potential advantages. Platform-based robotic rehabilitation can help patients recover from musculoskeletal and neurological conditions. Evidence on how platform-based robotic technologies can positively impact on disability recovery is still lacking, and it is unclear which intervention is most effective in individual cases. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of platform-based robotic rehabilitation for individuals with musculoskeletal or neurological injuries. Thirty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria and evaluated the efficacy of platform-based rehabilitation robots. Our findings showed that rehabilitation with platform-based robots produced some encouraging results. Among the platform-based robots studied, the VR-based Rutgers Ankle and the Hunova were found to be the most effective robots for the rehabilitation of patients with neurological conditions (stroke, spinal cord injury, Parkinson's disease) and various musculoskeletal ankle injuries. Our results were drawn mainly from studies with low-level evidence, and we think that our conclusions should be taken with caution to some extent and that further studies are needed to better evaluate the effectiveness of platform-based robotic rehabilitation devices.

Indexed as

clinical effectivenessneurorehabilitationorthopedic rehabilitationParkinson’s diseaseplatform-based robotic rehabilitationrobot-assisted trainingspinal cord injuriesstroke

Identifiers

PMID35447689
PMCPMC9029074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.