Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective:

To assess the feasibility of conducting a well-powered trial evaluating the neurological and functional effects of using an exoskeleton in individuals with chronic spinal cord injury.

Design:

A longitudinal, prospective, self-controlled feasibility study.

Setting:

Specialist Spinal Cord Injuries Centre, UK; 8 months during 2013–2014.

Subjects:

Individuals with chronic motor complete or incomplete spinal cord injury.

Interventions:

Enrolled subjects were assigned to 20 exoskeleton (ReWalk™, Argo Medical Technologies Ltd, Yokneam Ilit, Israel) training sessions over a 10-week training period.

Main measures:

Feasibility measures, clinical and mobility outcome measures and measures appraising subjects’ disability and attitude towards assistive technology were assessed before, during and after the study. Descriptive statistics were applied.

Results:

Out of 60 candidates, ten (17%) were enrolled and five (8%) completed the training programme. Primary reasons for not enrolling were ineligibility (n = 24, 40%) and limited interest to engage in a 10-week training programme (n = 16, 27%). Five out of ten enrolled subjects experienced grade I/II skin aberrations. While walking speeds were higher and walking distances were longer in all exoskeleton users when compared with non-use, the exoskeleton did generally not meet subjects’ high expectations in terms of perceived benefits.

Conclusions:

The conduct of a controlled trial evaluating the benefits of using exoskeletons that require a lengthy user-commitment to training of individuals with chronic motor complete or incomplete spinal cord injury comes with considerable feasibility challenges. Vigilance is required for preventing and detecting medical complications in spinal cord injury exoskeleton users.

Keywords

Spinal cord injury assistive technology exoskeleton ambulation feasibility study

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Harvey

Lin

Glinsky

. The effectiveness of physical interventions for people with spinal cord injuries: a systematic review. Spinal Cord 2009; 47: 184–195.

Ditunno

Patrick

Stineman

. Who wants to walk? Preferences for recovery after SCI: A longitudinal and cross-sectional study. Spinal Cord 2008; 46: 500–506.

van Middendorp

Hosman

Donders

. A clinical prediction rule for ambulation outcomes after traumatic spinal cord injury: A longitudinal cohort study. Lancet 2011; 377: 1004–1010.

Morawietz

Moffat

. Effects of locomotor training after incomplete spinal cord injury: A systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2013; 94: 2297–2308.

Esquenazi

Talaty

Packel

. The ReWalk powered exoskeleton to restore ambulatory function to individuals with thoracic-level motor-complete spinal cord injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2012; 91: 911–921.

Farris

Quintero

Murray

. A preliminary assessment of legged mobility provided by a lower limb exoskeleton for persons with paraplegia. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2014; 22: 482–490.

Kolakowsky-Hayner

Crew

Moran

. Safety and feasibility of using the EksoTM Bionic Exoskeleton to aid ambulation after spinal cord injury. Journal of Spine 2013.

Talaty

Esquenazi

Briceno

. Differentiating ability in users of the ReWalk(TM) powered exoskeleton: An analysis of walking kinematics. IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot 2013; 2013: 6650469.

Zeilig

Weingarden

Zwecker

. Safety and tolerance of the ReWalk exoskeleton suit for ambulation by people with complete spinal cord injury: A pilot study. J Spinal Cord Med 2012; 35: 96–101.

10.

Kirshblum

Burns

Biering-Sorensen

. International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury (revised 2011). J Spinal Cord Med 2011; 34: 535–546.

11.

Beeckman

Schoonhoven

Fletcher

. EPUAP classification system for pressure ulcers: European reliability study. J Adv Nurs 2007; 60: 682–691.

12.

Salbach

Mayo

Higgins

. Responsiveness and predictability of gait speed and other disability measures in acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001; 82: 1204–1212.

13.

ACoPSfCPF Laboratories. ATS statement: Guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002; 166: 111–117.

14.

Podsiadlo

Richardson

. The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991; 39: 142–148.

15.

Dean

Kennedy

. Measuring appraisals following acquired spinal cord injury: a preliminary psychometric analysis of the appraisals of disability. Rehabil Psychol 2009; 54: 222–231.

16.

Scherer

. Assessing the benefits of using assistive technologies and other supports for thinking, remembering and learning. Disabil Rehabil 2005; 27: 731–739.

17.

Fawcett

Curt

Steeves

. Guidelines for the conduct of clinical trials for spinal cord injury as developed by the ICCP panel: spontaneous recovery after spinal cord injury and statistical power needed for therapeutic clinical trials. Spinal Cord 2007; 45: 190–205.

18.

van Hedel

. Improvement in function after spinal cord injury: The black-box entitled rehabilitation. Swiss Med Wkly 2012; 142: w13673.

19.

Lapointe

Lajoie

Serresse

. Functional community ambulation requirements in incomplete spinal cord injured subjects. Spinal Cord 2001; 39: 327–335.

20.

Fineberg

Asselin

Harel

. Vertical ground reaction force-based analysis of powered exoskeleton-assisted walking in persons with motor-complete paraplegia. J Spinal Cord Med 2013; 36: 313–321.

21.

Marin

Nixon

Gorecki

. A systematic review of risk factors for the development and recurrence of pressure ulcers in people with spinal cord injuries. Spinal Cord 2013; 51: 522–527.

22.

Eser

Frotzler

Zehnder

. Fracture threshold in the femur and tibia of people with spinal cord injury as determined by peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 498–504.

23.

Fattal

Mariano-Goulart

Thomas

. Osteoporosis in persons with spinal cord injury: The need for a targeted therapeutic education. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92: 59–67.

24.

Brown-Triolo

Roach

Nelson

. Consumer perspectives on mobility: implications for neuroprosthesis design. J Rehabil Res Dev 2002; 39: 659–669.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.17 MB

0.18 MB

0.27 MB

Lower-limb exoskeletons for individuals with chronic spinal cord injury: findings from a feasibility study