Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40424335›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2025

Randomized, crossover clinical trial on the safety, feasibility, and usability of the ABLE exoskeleton: A comparative study with knee-ankle-foot orthoses.

Antonio Rodríguez-Fernández, Joan Lobo-Prat, Mariona Tolrà-Campanyà, Florentina Pérez-Cañabate, Josep M Font-Llagunes, Lluis Guirao-Cano

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

6 authors.

Antonio Rodríguez-FernándezBiomechanical Engineering Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering and Research Center for Biomedical Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6272-8326
Joan Lobo-PratABLE Human Motion, Barcelona, Spain.
Mariona Tolrà-CampanyàRehabilitation Service, Asepeyo Hospital Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Florentina Pérez-CañabateRehabilitation Service, Asepeyo Hospital Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Josep M Font-LlagunesBiomechanical Engineering Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering and Research Center for Biomedical Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7192-2980
Lluis Guirao-CanoRehabilitation Service, Hospital Universitario Mútua Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wearable exoskeletons are emerging as a new tool for gait training. However, comparisons between exoskeletons and conventional orthoses in terms of safety and feasibility are scarce. This study assessed the safety, feasibility, usability, and learning process of using the ABLE Exoskeleton in people with spinal cord injury (SCI) while comparing it with knee-ankle-foot orthoses (KAFOs). In this randomized, crossover clinical trial, 10 patients with chronic complete SCI (T4-T12) conducted a 10-session training and assessment protocol with each device: KAFOs and the ABLE Exoskeleton. Outcomes on safety (adverse events), and feasibility and usability (level of assistance, donning/doffing, therapy activities) were recorded for both devices. Evaluation sessions included standard clinical tests (Timed Up and Go, 10-Meter Walk Test, and 6-Minute Walk Test) to assess gait performance. The therapy metrics (number of steps, distance, gait speed, and standing and walking time) were recorded at each session for the robotic device. Participants quickly learned how to use the ABLE Exoskeleton, showing improvements in all therapy metrics (p<0.05) and the 6-Minute Walk Test (p<0.05). Participants reported less adverse events with the robotic device than KAFOs (17 and 31, respectively). Total donning and doffing time was 43 s faster with the robotic device using comparable levels of assistance. The time to complete the therapy activities was very similar between devices. Overall, participants needed 1 to 4 training sessions to perform essential therapy activities (sit/stand transitions, walking 10 meters, turning around) with both devices using minimum assistance or less. The results of this study show that it is feasible and safe for people with motor complete paraplegia due to SCI (T4-T12) to use the ABLE Exoskeleton for gait training in a rehabilitation hospital setting. The ABLE Exoskeleton proved to be as practical and easy to use as conventional orthoses, with fewer AEs reported when using the exoskeleton versus the KAFOs.

Indexed as

Exoskeleton DeviceFoot OrthosesSpinal Cord InjuriesAdultAnkleCross-Over StudiesFeasibility StudiesFemaleGaitHumansKneeMaleMiddle AgedWalking

Identifiers

PMID40424335
PMCPMC12112281

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.