ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025
Investigating the orthotic effect of a passive gravity-compensated exoskeletal device on upper-limb function in people with multiple sclerosis: a pilot cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Testing the usability of a voice control system for assistive robotic arms in people with neurological conditions.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultiple Sclerosis (MS) is a neurodegenerative disorder causing lower and upper-limb (UL) impairments and significantly affecting independence. Current assistive technologies for UL rehabilitation in People with MS (PwMS) rely on actuated robotic systems, which present high costs and complexity. Passive gravity-compensated exoskeletons represent a promising alternative; however, their functional benefits remain underexplored. This study aimed to redesign and evaluate the orthotic effect of a passive gravity-compensated exoskeleton device in supporting upper-limb function in PwMS.
methodsThis pilot cross-sectional study presents two phases: (I) redesigning an existing passive exoskeleton to improve usability and adaptability; (II) evaluating the orthotic effect and usability of the redesigned exoskeleton in a cohort of PwMS. Functional performance was assessed using the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and a modified Box and Block Test (mBBT) under Exoskeleton Supported and Exoskeleton Unsupported conditions. Kinematic parameters were extracted from three instrumented ARAT items, and usability was assessed with the System Usability Scale (SUS).
resultsPhase I led to an iterative refinement of the exoskeleton, incorporating feedback from three PwMS and two therapists. In Phase II, thirteen PwMS (age: 59 [55-69] years; 10 males; EDSS: 7.5 [6.5-8.0] points) with different UL disabilities were recruited. Four participants with severe impairments increased the UL movement (orthotic effect) by 35.8% [29.0%-41.9%] and 24.1% [14.9%-33.3%] in the vertical and anteroposterior direction, with 8 [6.5-9.25] points improvements in the overall ARAT. Conversely, three individuals with mild UL disability needed 2.63 [2.17-3.45] seconds more to complete the instrumented ARAT items increasing the Jerk Index by 0.53[0.51-0.68]. The overall ARAT decreased by 7 [6-8] points and they transported 10[9-18] blocks less in the mBBT. The remaining participants with an FSS > 5.5 points, transported 9.5 [8-11.25] blocks more in the mBBT. The median SUS score was 70[62.5-70].
conclusionsCollaboration between therapists and engineers was key in refining the exoskeleton during phase I. Phase II results supported its positive orthotic effect for PwMS, particularly for those with moderate to severe UL impairments and fatigue. However, for individuals with mild deficits, the device may alter movement dynamics, affecting execution quality. Future improvements should focus on reducing bulk for clinical use. Additionally, studies on larger populations are needed to validate these findings.
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.