Effectiveness of Robotic Devices for Medical Rehabilitation: An Umbrella Review.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Kei Kiyono, Shigeo Tanabe, Satoshi Hirano, Takuma Ii, Yuki Nakagawa, Koki Tan, Eiichi Saitoh, Yohei Otaka
{"title":"Effectiveness of Robotic Devices for Medical Rehabilitation: An Umbrella Review.","authors":"Kei Kiyono, Shigeo Tanabe, Satoshi Hirano, Takuma Ii, Yuki Nakagawa, Koki Tan, Eiichi Saitoh, Yohei Otaka","doi":"10.3390/jcm13216616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Clinical trials have investigated the efficacy of rehabilitation robotics for various pathological conditions, but the overall impact on rehabilitation practice remains unclear. We comprehensively examined and analyzed systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating rehabilitative interventions with robotic devices. <b>Methods:</b> Four databases were searched using term combinations of keywords related to robotic devices, rehabilitation, and SRs. The SR meta-analyses were categorized into \"convincing\", \"highly suggestive\", \"suggestive\", \"weak\", or \"non-significant\" depending on evidence strength and validity. <b>Results:</b> Overall, 62 SRs of 341 RCTs involving 14,522 participants were identified. Stroke was most frequently reported (40 SRs), followed by spinal cord injury (eight SRs), multiple sclerosis (four SRs), cerebral palsy (four SRs), Parkinson's disease (three SRs), and neurological disease (any disease causing limited upper- and lower-limb functioning; three SRs). Furthermore, 38, 21, and 3 SRs focused on lower-limb devices, upper-limb devices, and both upper- and lower-limb devices, respectively. Quantitative synthesis of robotic intervention effects was performed by 51 of 62 SRs. Robot-assisted training was effective for various outcome measures per disease. Meta-analyses offering suggestive evidence were limited to studies on stroke. Upper-limb devices were effective for motor control and activities of daily living, and lower-limb devices for walking independence in stroke. <b>Conclusions:</b> Robotic devices are useful for improving impairments and disabilities in several diseases. Further high-quality SRs including RCTs with large sample sizes and meta-analyses of these RCTs, particularly on non-stroke-related diseases, are required. Further research should also ascertain which type of robotic device is the most effective for improving each specific impairment or disability.</p>","PeriodicalId":15533,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","volume":"13 21","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11546060/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13216616","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Clinical trials have investigated the efficacy of rehabilitation robotics for various pathological conditions, but the overall impact on rehabilitation practice remains unclear. We comprehensively examined and analyzed systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating rehabilitative interventions with robotic devices. Methods: Four databases were searched using term combinations of keywords related to robotic devices, rehabilitation, and SRs. The SR meta-analyses were categorized into "convincing", "highly suggestive", "suggestive", "weak", or "non-significant" depending on evidence strength and validity. Results: Overall, 62 SRs of 341 RCTs involving 14,522 participants were identified. Stroke was most frequently reported (40 SRs), followed by spinal cord injury (eight SRs), multiple sclerosis (four SRs), cerebral palsy (four SRs), Parkinson's disease (three SRs), and neurological disease (any disease causing limited upper- and lower-limb functioning; three SRs). Furthermore, 38, 21, and 3 SRs focused on lower-limb devices, upper-limb devices, and both upper- and lower-limb devices, respectively. Quantitative synthesis of robotic intervention effects was performed by 51 of 62 SRs. Robot-assisted training was effective for various outcome measures per disease. Meta-analyses offering suggestive evidence were limited to studies on stroke. Upper-limb devices were effective for motor control and activities of daily living, and lower-limb devices for walking independence in stroke. Conclusions: Robotic devices are useful for improving impairments and disabilities in several diseases. Further high-quality SRs including RCTs with large sample sizes and meta-analyses of these RCTs, particularly on non-stroke-related diseases, are required. Further research should also ascertain which type of robotic device is the most effective for improving each specific impairment or disability.

医疗康复机器人设备的有效性:综述。
背景/目标:临床试验研究了康复机器人对各种病症的疗效,但其对康复实践的总体影响仍不明确。我们全面研究并分析了研究使用机器人设备进行康复干预的随机对照试验(RCT)的系统综述(SR)。研究方法使用与机器人设备、康复和 SR 相关的关键词组合检索了四个数据库。根据证据的强度和有效性,将SR荟萃分析分为 "有说服力"、"高度提示性"、"提示性"、"弱 "或 "无意义"。研究结果共鉴定了 341 项 RCT 中的 62 项 SR,涉及 14,522 名参与者。报告最多的是中风(40 份报告),其次是脊髓损伤(8 份报告)、多发性硬化(4 份报告)、脑瘫(4 份报告)、帕金森病(3 份报告)和神经系统疾病(任何导致上肢和下肢功能受限的疾病;3 份报告)。此外,分别有 38 份、21 份和 3 份研究报告侧重于下肢装置、上肢装置以及上肢和下肢装置。62 位员工代表中有 51 位对机器人干预效果进行了量化综合。机器人辅助训练对每种疾病的各种结果指标均有效。提供提示性证据的 Meta 分析仅限于有关中风的研究。上肢设备对中风患者的运动控制和日常生活活动有效,下肢设备对中风患者的独立行走有效。结论:机器人设备有助于改善多种疾病的损伤和残疾。需要进一步开展高质量的研究,包括大样本量的研究性试验和对这些研究性试验的荟萃分析,尤其是针对非中风相关疾病的研究。进一步的研究还应确定哪种类型的机器人设备对改善每种特定损伤或残疾最有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Journal of Clinical Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
6468
审稿时长
16.32 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383), is an international scientific open access journal, providing a platform for advances in health care/clinical practices, the study of direct observation of patients and general medical research. This multi-disciplinary journal is aimed at a wide audience of medical researchers and healthcare professionals. Unique features of this journal: manuscripts regarding original research and ideas will be particularly welcomed.JCM also accepts reviews, communications, and short notes. There is no limit to publication length: our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信