ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2025
Safety and Selection Criteria of Single-joint Hybrid Assistive Limb for Upper Limb Paralysis After Stroke: A Phase I Trial.
Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic rehabilitation is a high-intensity intervention for upper limb paralysis after a stroke. This study explored the safety and feasibility of using a single-joint hybrid assistive limb (HAL-SJ) exoskeletal device for upper limb paralysis in patients with acute stroke. In total, 11 patients with stroke (6 with moderate paralysis and 5 with severe paralysis) were enrolled between October 2021 and October 2023 in a stroke care unit. The patients underwent HAL training 3 times a week for 6 sessions. No serious adverse events related to HAL-SJ occurred, and participants demonstrated significant improvements in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) (pre- vs. post-intervention; p < 0.05). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for FMA-UE was surpassed in 5 patients (83.3%) with moderate paralysis and 2 (40.0%) with severe paralysis. Regarding ARAT, 4 patients (66.7%) with moderate paralysis exceeded the MCID, whereas none (0.0%) with severe paralysis did. These findings suggest that HAL-SJ is both safe and feasible, particularly for individuals with moderate paralysis.
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.