Effectiveness of robot-assisted gait training on motor impairments in people with Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 REHABILITATION
Mohammad Alwardat, Mohammad Etoom, Salameh Al Dajah, Tommaso Schirinzi, Giulia Di Lazzaro, Paola Sinibaldi Salimei, Nicola Biagio Mercuri, Antonio Pisani
{"title":"Effectiveness of robot-assisted gait training on motor impairments in people with Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Mohammad Alwardat,&nbsp;Mohammad Etoom,&nbsp;Salameh Al Dajah,&nbsp;Tommaso Schirinzi,&nbsp;Giulia Di Lazzaro,&nbsp;Paola Sinibaldi Salimei,&nbsp;Nicola Biagio Mercuri,&nbsp;Antonio Pisani","doi":"10.1097/MRR.0000000000000312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) on motor impairments in people with Parkinson's disease (PD). A computer-based systematic literature search was performed in six databases according to PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effects of RAGT on motor impairments in people with PD were included. GRADE approach and PEDro scale were used to determine the studies' quality of evidence. Meta-analyses were performed by calculating the weighted mean difference (WMD) at 95% confidence interval. Seven RCTs (PEDro: 5-8) met the inclusion criteria for systematic review and meta-analyses. The meta-analysis showed significant improvement on Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale Part III after intervention [WMD=3.292; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.378-5.207; P=0.000], and after 1-month follow-up (WMD=5.512; 95% CI=2.396-8.629; P=0.001). Stride length (WMD=9.283; 95% CI=7.153-11.414; P=0.00) and gait speed (WMD=0.166; 95% CI=-0.090 to 0.243; P=0.000) showed significant improvements after RAGT. Balance as measured by Berg Balance Scale was improved significantly after intervention (WMD=3.87; 95% CI=0.374-6.735; P=0.029) and at 1-month follow-up (WMD=3.87; 95% CI=1.324-6.413; P=0.002). The pooled analysis did not detect any significant changes regarding stride time, cadence and functional balance scales. GRADE level of evidence ranged between high and low. The RAGT showed better outcomes than conventional interventions on some motor aspects in PD. However, RAGT did not seem superior to control interventions. Further RCTs that examine the effect of RAGT on more specific outcomes and at different medication statuses are required.</p>","PeriodicalId":14301,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Rehabilitation Research","volume":" ","pages":"287-296"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000312","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Rehabilitation Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000312","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of robot-assisted gait training (RAGT) on motor impairments in people with Parkinson's disease (PD). A computer-based systematic literature search was performed in six databases according to PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effects of RAGT on motor impairments in people with PD were included. GRADE approach and PEDro scale were used to determine the studies' quality of evidence. Meta-analyses were performed by calculating the weighted mean difference (WMD) at 95% confidence interval. Seven RCTs (PEDro: 5-8) met the inclusion criteria for systematic review and meta-analyses. The meta-analysis showed significant improvement on Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale Part III after intervention [WMD=3.292; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.378-5.207; P=0.000], and after 1-month follow-up (WMD=5.512; 95% CI=2.396-8.629; P=0.001). Stride length (WMD=9.283; 95% CI=7.153-11.414; P=0.00) and gait speed (WMD=0.166; 95% CI=-0.090 to 0.243; P=0.000) showed significant improvements after RAGT. Balance as measured by Berg Balance Scale was improved significantly after intervention (WMD=3.87; 95% CI=0.374-6.735; P=0.029) and at 1-month follow-up (WMD=3.87; 95% CI=1.324-6.413; P=0.002). The pooled analysis did not detect any significant changes regarding stride time, cadence and functional balance scales. GRADE level of evidence ranged between high and low. The RAGT showed better outcomes than conventional interventions on some motor aspects in PD. However, RAGT did not seem superior to control interventions. Further RCTs that examine the effect of RAGT on more specific outcomes and at different medication statuses are required.

机器人辅助步态训练对帕金森病患者运动障碍的有效性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是评估机器人辅助步态训练(RAGT)对帕金森病(PD)患者运动障碍的有效性。根据PRISMA指南,在六个数据库中进行了基于计算机的系统文献检索。随机对照试验(rct)评估了RAGT对PD患者运动障碍的影响。采用GRADE方法和PEDro量表来确定研究的证据质量。在95%置信区间计算加权平均差(WMD)进行meta分析。7项随机对照试验(PEDro: 5-8)符合系统评价和荟萃分析的纳入标准。meta分析显示,干预后统一帕金森病评定量表第三部分评分显著改善[WMD=3.292;95%置信区间(CI)=1.378-5.207;P=0.000],随访1个月后(WMD=5.512;95%可信区间= 2.396 - -8.629;P = 0.001)。步长(WMD=9.283;95%可信区间= 7.153 - -11.414;P=0.00)、步速(WMD=0.166;95% CI=-0.090 ~ 0.243;P=0.000)在RAGT后有显著改善。干预后,Berg平衡量表测量的平衡感明显改善(WMD=3.87;95%可信区间= 0.374 - -6.735;P=0.029)和随访1个月时(WMD=3.87;95%可信区间= 1.324 - -6.413;P = 0.002)。合并分析未发现步幅时间、节奏和功能平衡量表有任何显著变化。GRADE证据等级介于高和低之间。RAGT在PD的某些运动方面表现出比常规干预更好的结果。然而,RAGT似乎并不优于对照干预。需要进一步的随机对照试验来检验RAGT对更具体结果和不同用药状态的影响。
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
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Rehabilitation Research is a quarterly, peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary forum for the publication of research into functioning, disability and contextual factors experienced by persons of all ages in both developed and developing societies. The wealth of information offered makes the journal a valuable resource for researchers, practitioners, and administrators in such fields as rehabilitation medicine, outcome measurement nursing, social and vocational rehabilitation/case management, return to work, special education, social policy, social work and social welfare, sociology, psychology, psychiatry assistive technology and environmental factors/disability. Areas of interest include functioning and disablement throughout the life cycle; rehabilitation programmes for persons with physical, sensory, mental and developmental disabilities; measurement of functioning and disability; special education and vocational rehabilitation; equipment access and transportation; information technology; independent living; consumer, legal, economic and sociopolitical aspects of functioning, disability and contextual factors.
×
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
小红书