Trial reportPloS one2025
The impact of a commercial lower extremity exoskeleton on metabolic load, perceived exertion, and physiological response to a challenging military relevant task: A randomized cross-over design pilot study.
Trial report in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo assess physiological metrics during the use of a commercially available bilateral active ankle exoskeleton during a challenging military-relevant task and if use of the exoskeleton during this task influences: metabolic load, physiological measures or rate of perceived exertion.
methodsNine healthy volunteers (5M, 4F) completed this randomized cross-over design trial, with a baseline visit and two randomized test sessions (with/without the exoskeleton). Variables included impact on time to exhaustion during walking on a treadmill at varying speeds and gradients (0-15%) at 26.7°C, 50% humidity with a loaded rucksack (30% body weight). The primary outcome measure was change in metabolic cost with/without the exoskeleton (O2 consumption, metabolic equivalents); secondary outcomes were change in heart rate and perceived exertion between conditions.
resultsParticipants averaged 22.4 ± 4.5 years old, 173.7 ± 7.4 cm tall, weighed 80.9 ± 13.9 kg, and VO2max of 43.8 ± 10.6 mL/kg/min. Total kcals did not differ between conditions (with/without exoskeleton; t = 0.98; p = 0.357). Kcals/min were significantly lower (1.06 kcals/min) with the exoskeleton (t = 3.94; p = 0.004). Average oxygen consumption (VO2) was significantly lower (2.36 mL/kg/min) with the exoskeleton (t = 2.81; p = 0.023), and peak VO2 was 3.33 mL/kg/min lower with the exoskeleton (t = 2.37; p = 0.045). Peak and Average METS were also lower with the exoskeleton by 0.98 (t = 2.61; p = 0.031) and 1.23 (t = 2.39; p = 0.044) respectively.
conclusionsResults suggest a powered ankle exoskeleton may decrease energy consumption during military relevant tasks when conducted in a laboratory environment. There may also be physiological benefits such as reduced core temperate and heart rate. Replication of this work in the field environment is warranted.
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.