SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2025
Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The past, present and future of control architectures in lower-limb cable-driven robots for gait rehabilitation.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- High-intensity interval training after stroke: a three-level random-effects meta-analysis with cluster-robust inference and exploratory dose-parameter signals.Frontiers in neurologyPooled it
- The Effect of Robot-Assisted Gait Training on Balance, Gait and Kinesiophobia in Individuals With Post-Stroke Hemiparesis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2026Trial
- Who may benefit from robot-assisted gait training with an exoskeleton in subacute stroke patients? A prespecified analysis.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2026Trial
- The recovery of lower limb function in stroke patients: which sequence of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with lower limb rehabilitation robot is most effective-A randomized controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- Robot-assisted gait training in people with subacute and chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Trial
- A Multimodal Therapist-Supervised Robotic Gait-Training Platform with Phase-Synchronized Infrared Thermal Biofeedback: A Concept-Level Technical and Translational Healthcare Framework.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Structured Digital Device Instruction for Older Adults With Stroke During Convalescent Rehabilitation: Prospective Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Effects of Knee-Powered Exoskeleton-Assisted Gait Training on Walking Function and Symmetry in Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Pilot Trial.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Implementing Rehabilitation Robotics in Routine Care: A Mapping Review of Service Delivery Models, Implementation Determinants, Strategies, and Real-World Outcomes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Neuroplasticity After Stroke: Clinical Evidence and Its Implication for Effective Rehabilitation Strategies.Brain & NeuroRehabilitation · 2026Review
- Exploring the Feasibility and Patient Acceptance of RAGT for Overground Ambulation in Adults With Guillain-Barré Syndrome: A Scoping Review.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2026Review
- Long-Term Outcome After Intensive Stroke Rehabilitation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Key factors for successful gait acquisition in individuals with severe hemiplegic subacute stroke using a single-legged gait-training assistance robot: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Observational
- Brain adaptations in challenging walking task of people with stroke: an experimental study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Ninety-Seven Percent of Trials Investigating Robotic Interventions in Physiotherapy Contained Abstract Spin: A Meta-Research Review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Review
- Quantifying Innovation in Stroke: Large Language Model Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted gait training yields superior functional gains in non-ambulatory subacute stroke patients.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
- A central-peripheral approach to gait rehabilitation in chronic acquired brain injury: robotic training and motor imagery.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
- Clinical usability and functional outcomes of a lightweight robotic orthosis (HKAFO) in chronic stroke patients with hemiplegic gait: a pilot study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleWalking difficulties are common after a stroke. During rehabilitation, electromechanical and robotic gait-training devices can help improve walking. As the evidence and certainty of the evidence may have changed since our last update in 2020, we aimed to update the scientific evidence on the benefits and acceptability of these technologies to ensure they remain a viable option for stroke rehabilitation.
objectivesPrimary • To determine whether electromechanical- and robot-assisted gait training versus physiotherapy (or usual care) improves walking in adults after stroke. Secondary • To determine whether electromechanical- and robot-assisted gait training versus physiotherapy (or usual care) after stroke improves walking velocity, walking capacity, acceptability, and death from all causes until the end of the intervention phase. SEARCH
methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and seven other databases. We handsearched relevant conference proceedings, searched trials and research registers, checked reference lists, and contacted trial authors to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials. The date of the latest search was December 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials and randomised controlled cross-over trials in people over the age of 18 years diagnosed with stroke of any severity, at any stage, in any setting, evaluating electromechanical- and robot-assisted gait training versus physiotherapy (or usual care). OUTCOMES: Our critical outcome was the ability to walk independently, measured with the Functional Ambulation Category (FAC). An FAC score of 4 or 5 indicated independent walking over a 15-metre surface, irrespective of aids used, such as a cane. An FAC score less than 4 indicates dependency in walking (supervision or assistance, or both, must be given in performing walking). Important outcomes included walking velocity and capacity, as well as dropouts. RISK OF BIAS: We used Cochrane's RoB 1 tool. SYNTHESIS
methodsTwo review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed methodological quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. We used random-effects models for the meta-analysis. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. INCLUDED STUDIES: We included 101 studies (39 new studies plus 62 studies from previous versions) with a total of 4224 participants after stroke in our review update. SYNTHESIS OF
resultsElectromechanical-assisted gait training in combination with physiotherapy probably increases the odds of participants becoming independent in walking (odds ratio (OR) 1.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 2.25; P = 0.001; I² = 31%; 51 studies, 2148 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); probably does not increase mean walking velocity (mean difference (MD) 0.05 m/s, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.08; P < 0.001; I² = 58%; 73 studies, 3043 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and does not increase mean walking capacity (MD 11 metres walked in 6 minutes, 95% CI 1.8 to 20.3; P = 0.02; I² = 43%; 42 studies, 1966 participants; high-certainty evidence). Electromechanical-assisted gait training does not increase or decrease the risk of loss to the study during the intervention or the risk of death from all causes (high-certainty evidence). At follow-up after study end, electromechanical-assisted gait training in combination with physiotherapy may not increase the odds of participants becoming independent in walking (OR 1.64, 95% CI 0.77 to 3.48; P = 0.20; I² = 69%; 8 studies, 569 participants; low-certainty evidence), and probably does not increase mean walking velocity (MD 0.05 m/s, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.13; P = 0.22; I² = 66%; 17 studies, 857 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or mean walking capacity (MD 9.6 metres walked in 6 minutes, 95% CI -14.6 to 33.7; P = 0.44; I² = 53%; 15 studies, 736 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Our results must be interpreted with caution because (1) some trials investigated people who were independent in walking at the start of the study; and (2) there was variation between trials with respect to the devices used and duration and frequency of treatment. AUTHORS'
conclusionsModerate-certainty evidence shows that people who receive electromechanical-assisted gait training in combination with physiotherapy after stroke are probably more likely to achieve independent walking than people who receive gait training without these devices.We concluded that nine patients need to be treated to prevent one dependency in walking. Further research should consist of large, definitive pragmatic phase 3 trials undertaken to address specific questions about the most effective frequency and duration of electromechanical-assisted gait training, as well as how long any benefit may last. Future trials should consider time poststroke in their trial design.
fundingThis Cochrane review had no dedicated funding. REGISTRATION: Protocol (2006): doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006185 Original review (2007): doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub2 Review update (2013): doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub3 Review update (2017): doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub4 Review update (2020): doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub5.
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.