Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025
Efficacy of bilateral soft exoskeleton training for people with subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial.
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. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Gait Training with Lower-Limb Robotic Exoskeletons and Exoskeleton-Type Devices on Gait Symmetry and Gait Speed in Patients with Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSoft exoskeletons (SE) show promise for restoring ambulation after stroke, but evidence remains limited. This study evaluated the efficacy of bilateral SE-assisted gait training in subacute stroke.
methodsIn this single-blind randomized controlled trial, 60 participants with subacute stroke were randomly assigned to either the bilateral SE group or the conventional training (CT) group. Both groups received 30-min conventional physical therapy per day for 20 days. Additionally, the SE group performed 30-min bilateral SE-assisted treadmill walking training once daily, while the CT group underwent unassisted treadmill walking training with the same frequency and duration. The primary outcome was the Functional Ambulation Category (FAC). Secondary outcomes were Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Lower Extremity (FMA-LE), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), spatiotemporal parameters, gait symmetry, and lower-limb kinematics. Within-group improvements from baseline to post-intervention were assessed using paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Between-group comparisons were performed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), with post-intervention scores as the dependent variable and baseline values as the covariate.
resultsAfter 20-session interventions, both groups showed significant within-group improvements in clinical scores, gait speed, gait symmetry, and paretic lower-limb joint peak angles (p < 0.05). Between-group analysis showed that the SE group achieved significantly greater post-intervention scores in FAC (adjusted mean difference [AMD] = 0.37, p = 0.022, partial η²=0.089), FMA-LE (AMD = 2.21, p = 0.001, partial η² = 0.178), BBS (AMD = 1.84, p = 0.019, partial η² = 0.093 ), and faster gait speed (AMD = 0.07, p = 0.013 partial η² = 0.103) than the CT group. For Spatiotemporal analysis, the SE group demonstrated significantly longer paretic step length (AMD = 0.10, p = 0.001, partial η² = 0.145) and shorter paretic swing time (AMD = - 0.06, p = 0.014, partial η² = 0.102) than the CT group, whereas no significant between-group differences were observed for cadence and stance time (p > 0.05). In terms of gait symmetry, the SE group exhibited significantly lower temporal symmetry ratio (AMD = - 0.14, p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.215) and spatial symmetry ratio (AMD = - 0.30, p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.260) than the CT group, indicating improved symmetry. Kinematic analysis revealed that the SE group achieved greater peak angles in paretic knee flexion (AMD = 3.29°, p = 0.019, partial η² = 0.092), paretic ankle dorsiflexion (AMD = 2.10°, p = 0.001, partial η² = 0.166), less-affected ankle plantarflexion (AMD = 2.74°, p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.194) than the CT group. However, the SE group showed a smaller peak knee flexion in the less-affected (AMD= - 1.46, p = 0.037, partial η² = 0.074) than the CT group. No other joint angles showed significant between-group differences (p > 0.05), and no serious adverse events were reported throughout the study.
conclusionBilateral SE-assisted gait training is a safe and effective approach to improving motor function and gait performance in people with subacute stroke. Further studies with larger cohorts and longer follow-up are needed to investigate long-term benefits and neural mechanisms.
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.