Does robot-assisted gait training represent a true advancement in post-stroke walking rehabilitation?

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Prakash V, Shrushti Shah
{"title":"Does robot-assisted gait training represent a true advancement in post-stroke walking rehabilitation?","authors":"Prakash V, Shrushti Shah","doi":"10.1080/14737175.2025.2564712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) has gained prominence in stroke rehabilitation, promoted as a technologically advanced intervention to improve walking outcomes. However, evidence from clinical trials and systematic reviews paints a more equivocal picture. Despite its widespread adoption, questions persist regarding its true clinical utility and whether it offers meaningful benefits beyond conventional physiotherapy.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>This perspective evaluates the evidence base for RAGT by critically reviewing recent systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials, with particular attention to study designs, comparator interventions, and reported outcomes. It highlights the overreliance on surrogate outcomes and underlines the need to focus on meaningful functional endpoints like walking independence and community mobility. Studies that directly compare RAGT with task-specific overground gait training (TOGT) are emphasized, as these provide the most relevant insights into RAGT's additive value.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Without evidence of clear additive value, the continued emphasis on RAGT may reflect technological enthusiasm more than therapeutic necessity. The field must reconsider its priorities, redirecting research efforts toward optimizing scalable, high-intensity TOGT that aligns more closely with real-world functional recovery. Future research should prioritize direct comparisons between RAGT and optimized TOGT, with a stronger focus on outcomes that matter to patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":12190,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737175.2025.2564712","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) has gained prominence in stroke rehabilitation, promoted as a technologically advanced intervention to improve walking outcomes. However, evidence from clinical trials and systematic reviews paints a more equivocal picture. Despite its widespread adoption, questions persist regarding its true clinical utility and whether it offers meaningful benefits beyond conventional physiotherapy.

Areas covered: This perspective evaluates the evidence base for RAGT by critically reviewing recent systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials, with particular attention to study designs, comparator interventions, and reported outcomes. It highlights the overreliance on surrogate outcomes and underlines the need to focus on meaningful functional endpoints like walking independence and community mobility. Studies that directly compare RAGT with task-specific overground gait training (TOGT) are emphasized, as these provide the most relevant insights into RAGT's additive value.

Expert opinion: Without evidence of clear additive value, the continued emphasis on RAGT may reflect technological enthusiasm more than therapeutic necessity. The field must reconsider its priorities, redirecting research efforts toward optimizing scalable, high-intensity TOGT that aligns more closely with real-world functional recovery. Future research should prioritize direct comparisons between RAGT and optimized TOGT, with a stronger focus on outcomes that matter to patients.

机器人辅助步态训练是否代表了中风后步行康复的真正进步?
机器人辅助步态训练(RAGT)在中风康复中获得了突出地位,作为一种技术先进的干预措施,以改善步行结果。然而,来自临床试验和系统评价的证据描绘了一幅更加模棱两可的画面。尽管它被广泛采用,但关于它真正的临床用途以及它是否提供了传统物理治疗之外的有意义的益处,问题仍然存在。涵盖领域:本视角通过批判性地回顾最近的系统评价和随机对照试验来评估RAGT的证据基础,特别关注研究设计、比较干预措施和报告的结果。它强调了对替代结果的过度依赖,并强调需要关注有意义的功能终点,如行走独立性和社区流动性。我们强调了直接比较RAGT和特定任务的地面步态训练(TOGT)的研究,因为这些研究为RAGT的附加价值提供了最相关的见解。专家意见:在没有明确的附加价值证据的情况下,继续强调RAGT可能更多地反映了技术热情而不是治疗必要性。该领域必须重新考虑其优先事项,将研究工作转向优化可扩展的、高强度的TOGT,以更紧密地与现实世界的功能恢复保持一致。未来的研究应优先考虑RAGT和优化TOGT之间的直接比较,并更加关注对患者重要的结果。
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
Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics
Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
2.30%
发文量
61
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics (ISSN 1473-7175) provides expert reviews on the use of drugs and medicines in clinical neurology and neuropsychiatry. Coverage includes disease management, new medicines and drugs in neurology, therapeutic indications, diagnostics, medical treatment guidelines and neurological diseases such as stroke, epilepsy, Alzheimer''s and Parkinson''s. Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Review format and includes the following sections: Expert Opinion - a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信