ArticleCureus2025
A Pilot Study Evaluating the Safety and Clinical Use of a Leg Exercise Apparatus in Patients With Stroke or Spinal Cord Injury: A Comparison With an Ergometer.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe leg exercise apparatus (LEX), initially developed to prevent thrombosis, may also serve as a rehabilitation exercise device due to its ability to promote active movement. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the safety and clinical indications of LEX exercises in patients with stroke or spinal cord injury (SCI). MATERIALS AND
methodsNine patients with stroke or SCI participated in this study. Participants were assessed for paralysis, muscle strength, sensation, range of motion (ROM), spasticity, vital signs, and modified Borg scale (mBS) scores for respiratory and lower extremity fatigue. Each participant performed LEX and ergometer exercises for five minutes, with the number of repetitions recorded for both. After each session, ROM, spasticity, vital signs, and mBS were re-evaluated. After completing all exercise sessions, participants completed a questionnaire regarding their experience with each device and reported any adverse events. The primary outcome was the occurrence of adverse events within one hour following LEX exercise.
resultsTwo patients with SCI reported transient pain attributed to device contact or increased spasticity that resolved within an hour. During the LEX exercise, two participants required assistance, primarily to prevent the hip joint from excessive abduction. Three participants required assistance with the ergometer, including the prevention of excessive hip abduction and avoiding reverse pedaling. One participant required both types of assistance and discontinued the ergometer exercise midway. The mBS scores indicated lower fatigue levels with LEX compared to the fatigue levels with the ergometer, likely due to difficulties in controlling rotational movement with the latter. Therefore, LEX appeared to be more suitable than the ergometer for sustained exercise in patients with motor impairments such as stroke or SCI.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated that LEX is safe for patients with stroke or SCI, with only minor transient adverse events. With slight modifications to improve stability and usability, LEX may be a practical and effective option for lower limb rehabilitation in patients with motor impairments.
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.