ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Portable exoskeletons for upper limb rehabilitation: A systematic review.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 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.
- Portable exoskeletons for upper limb rehabilitation: A systematic review.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and feasibility of portable exoskeletons for upper limb rehabilitation in patients post-stroke and with postoperative neurological complications. It focuses on motor function, range of motion (ROM), spasticity reduction and improvements in daily living activities. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines [12], PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases were searched up to October 2024 using combinations of keywords and MeSH terms such as "exoskeleton devices" and "shoulder rehabilitation." Included studies (January 2008-October 2023) assessed portable exoskeletons for upper limb function in patients with chronic stroke or postoperative neurological complications. Excluded were studies on non-portable robots, animal studies, protocols, those without quantitative outcomes, and those not involving human patients. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal tool, and the Risk Of Bias 2 (ROB2) tool assessed study bias. Results: Five selected studies included 70 patients. Evaluated exoskeletons included the Tenodesis-Induced-Grip Exoskeleton Robot (TIGER), Wilmington Robotic Exoskeleton (WREX), Hybrid Exoskeleton Upper Limb 30A (HEXO-UR30A), and Hybrid Assistive Limb (HAL). These devices demonstrated significant improvements in motor function, ROM, spasticity reduction, and kinematic parameters. High adherence and absence of severe adverse events supported feasibility. Conclusion: Portable exoskeletons are promising tools for upper limb rehabilitation post-stroke and after neurological surgery. They enhance motor recovery and functional outcomes. However, moderate risk of bias, small sample sizes, and limited data in orthopedic contexts-especially comparisons with conventional rehabilitation-underscore the need for further high-quality RCTs. Level of Evidence: Level IV.
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.