Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41013571›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025

Safety assessment and feasibility of the TWIICE powered exoskeleton for assisted ambulation in individuals with spinal cord injury.

Carina Lang, Inge Eriks-Hoogland, Claudio Perret, Mohamed Bouri, Mario Widmer

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report 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. It is linked to trial NCT05926310 (Two-phase Pilot Study on the Safety and Feasibility of TWIICE Rise for Exoskeleton-assisted Ambulation in Patients With Spinal Cord Injury), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT05926310 naunknown statusnot on this map

Two-phase Pilot Study on the Safety and Feasibility of TWIICE Rise for Exoskeleton-assisted Ambulation in Patients With Spinal Cord Injury

TypeinterventionalSponsorTWIICERan2023 to 2024Enrolled15ConditionsSpinal Cord Injuries, Gait Disorders, NeurologicArmsTWIICE Rise
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

5 authors.

Carina LangDepartment of Therapy, Swiss Paraplegic Centre, Nottwil, Switzerland.
Inge Eriks-HooglandOutpatient Care Unit, Swiss Paraplegic Centre, Nottwil, Switzerland.
Claudio PerretFaculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Mohamed BouriREHAssist, Institute of Neuro-X, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Mario WidmerNeuro-Musculoskeletal Functioning and Mobility Group, Swiss Paraplegic Research, Guido A. Zäch Strasse 4, 6207, Nottwil, Switzerland. mario.widmer@paraplegie.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFollowing spinal cord injury (SCI), powered exoskeletons have been shown to enable assisted walking and may also positively impact secondary health conditions. The TWIICE exoskeleton is intended to enable individuals with SCI to train at home or in community during their activities of daily living under the supervision of a therapist. The aim of this pilot clinical trial was to assess the safety and feasibility of the TWIICE powered exoskeleton for assisted ambulation in a clinical setting.

methodsThis single-arm, open label feasibility study included 5 non-ambulatory individuals at least 6 months after onset of traumatic or non-traumatic SCI. Participants used the TWIICE exoskeleton during 6 sessions in the therapy premises of a Swiss SCI-specialized clinic undergoing a progressive mobility training. The incidence of adverse device effects (ADEs) was the primary outcome. In addition, standard walking tests such as 10 m Walk Test (10MWT), 6-minute Walk Test (6MWT), and Timed Up and Go (TUG) were performed using the device during the final session to evaluate usability after short-term training. Data are presented as median (range).

resultsWe recruited 5 non-ambulatory individuals with SCI (2 females / 3 males, 32 (21-45) years of age). Four participants were motor complete (T6-T11) and 1 was motor incomplete (C7). Of the 10 adverse events occurring over the course of the 30 cumulative sessions, 4 were categorized as ADEs: reddening of the skin at contact points with the device (2x), transient intensification of neuropathic pain, and transient increase of spasticity. All ADEs subsided after a short time and without any sequelae. After 6 sessions, participants walked the 10MWT in 33 (24-144) seconds and were able to achieve 98 (37-137) meters during a 6MWT while using the device. Finally, the TUG was performed with the device and moderate assistance in 103 (61-135) seconds.

conclusionsNo serious safety concerns were identified during this feasibility study in a clinical setting. After 6 sessions, our relatively young and fit study population showed a variable but generally good performance in clinical measures when compared to reports on commercialized powered exoskeletons.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05926310.

Indexed as

Exoskeleton DeviceSpinal Cord InjuriesWalkingAdultFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsWalk TestYoung AdultActivities of daily livingAssistive technologyExoskeletonFeasibilityGaitMobilitySpinal cord injuryUser satisfactionWearable robotics

Identifiers

PMID41013571
PMCPMC12465450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.