Robot-assisted gait training provide a big therapeutic advantage in functional mobility for postural control.
OBJECTIVES:
The purpose of this study was investigate the effects of robot-assisted gait training using virtual reality and auditory stimulation on balance and gait abilities in stroke patients.
METHODS:
All subjects were randomly divided into three groups where twelve subjects were in the Virtual reality robot-assisted gait training group (VRGT), twelve subjects in the auditory stimulation robot-assisted gait training group (ARGT), and sixteen subjects in the control group. Subjects received virtual reality and auditory stimulation while undergoing robot-assisted gait training for 45 minutes, three times a week for 6 weeks, and all subjects had undergone general physical therapy for 30 minutes, five times a week for 6 weeks. All subjects were assessed with the Medical Research Council (MRC), Berg balance scale (BBS), timed up and go test (TUG), 10-meter walk test (10MWT), Fugl-Myer Assessment (FMA) and Modified Barthel Index (MBI) pre- and post-intervention.
RESULTS:
Results showed that BBS, TUG, and 10MWT scores significantly improved post-intervention (p < 0.05), and the control group also had significantly improved in all areas post-treatment (p < 0.05). In addition, it has been confirmed that VRGT had significantly improved in MRC and FMA scores compared with the auditory stimulation. Also, it has significantly improved in MRC, BBS, TUG, 10MWT and FMA compared with control group (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS:
The results of this study showed improve balance and gait abilities after VRGT compared with general physical therapy and were found to be effective in enhancing the functional activity of persons with stroke.
AnatM., BenjaminP., PaoloB., JudithD. (2010). Effects of virtual reality training on gait biomechanics of individuals post-stroke, Gait & Posture, 31(2010), 433–437.
2.
BergK., Wood-DauphineeS., WilliamsJ. I. (1995). The Balance Scale: Reliability assessment with elderly residents and patients with an acute stroke, Scand J Rehabil Med, 27(1), 27–36.
3.
BrittaH., FriedemannM., CarmenK., . (2007). Effects of locomotion training with assistance of a robot-driven gait orthosis in hemiparetic patients after stroke: A randomized controlled pilot study, Stroke, 38(2), 349–354.
4.
CanningB., SanchezG. (2004). Considering powered mobility for individuals with stroke, Top Stroke Rehabil, 11(2), 84–88.
5.
CarrShepherd, Nordholm & Lynne. (1985). Investigation of a new motor assessment scale for stroke patients, Phys Ther, 65(2), 175–180.
6.
CélineB., DidierP., JulienB., JohannaR., NicolasV., NicolasR. (2014). Effects of gait training using a robotic constraint on gait kinematics and kinetics in chronic stroke patients, J Rehabil Med, 46, 132–138.
7.
ChandramouliK., DespinaK., YasinY. D., WilliamZ. R. (2013). Reducing Robotic Guidance During Robot-Assisted Gait Training Improves Gait Function: A Case Report on a Stroke Survivor, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 94, 1202–1206.
8.
Del OlmoM. F., AriasP., FurioM. C., PozoM. A., CudeiroJ. (2006). Evaluation of the effect of training using auditory stimulation on rhythmic movement in Parkinsonian patients a combined motor and [18F]-FDG PET study, Parkinsonism Relat Disord, 12(3), 155–164.
9.
DeutschJ. E., MeriansA. S., AdamovichS., PoiznerH., BurdeaG. C. (2004). Development and application of virtual reality technology to improve hand use and gait of individuals post-stroke, Restor Neurol Neurosci, 22(3-5), 371–386.
10.
DiasD., LainsJ., PereiraA., NunesR., CaldasJ., AmaralC., . (2007). Can we improve gait skills in chronic hemiplegics? A randomised control trial with gait trainer, Eura Medicophys, 43, 499–504.
11.
Dong-SoonL., Kyung-HwaL., Tae-WooK., Sung-TaeC. (2013). Effect of early robot-assisted training using virtual reality program in patient with stroke, J Korean Soc Phys Ther, 25(4), 195–203.
12.
EsquenaziA., PackelA. (2012). Robotic-assisted gait training and restoration. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 91, S217–227; quiz S228-231.
13.
Fugl-MeyerA. R., JääsköL., LeymanI., OlssonS., SteglindS. (1975). The post-stroke hemiplegic patient: A method for evaluation of physical performance, Scand J Rehabil Med, 7(1), 13–31.
14.
GoldshtromY., KnorrG., GoldshtromI. (2010). Rhythmic exercises in rehabilitation of TBI patients: A case report, J Bodyw Mov Ther, 14(4), 336–345.
15.
GrangerC. V., AlbrechtG. L., HamiltonB. B. (1979). Outcome of comprehensive medical rehabilitation: Measurement by PULSES profile and the Barthel Index, Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 60(4), 145–154.
16.
GregsonJ. M., LeathleyM. J., MooreA. P., SmithT. L., SharmaA. K., WatkinsC. L. (2000). Reliability of measurements of muscle tone and muscle power in stroke patients, Age Ageing, 29(3), 223–228.
17.
HarveyR. L. (2009). Improving poststroke recovery: Neuroplasticity and task-oriented training, Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med, 11(3), 251–259.
18.
HorlingsC. G., CarpenterM. G., KüngU. M., HoneggerF., WiederholdB., AllumJ. H. (2009). Influence of virtual reality on postural stability during movements of quiet stance, Neurosci Lett, 451(3), 227–231.
19.
JangS. H., KimY. H., ChoS. H., LeeJ. H., ParkJ. W., KwonY. H. (2003). Cortical reorganization induced by task-oriented training in chronic hemiplegic stroke patients, Neuroreport, 14(1), 137–141.
20.
JeongS., KimM. T. (2007). Effects of a theory-driven music and movement program for stroke survivors in a community setting, Appl Nurs Res, 20(3), 125–131.
21.
JinK. Y., NaE. A., DaeH. K., DeogY. K. (2014). Plantar Pressure Distribution During Robotic-Assisted Gait in Post-stroke Hemiplegic Patients, Ann Rehabil Med, 38(2), 145–152.
22.
JohanssonB. B. (2000). Brain plasticity and stroke rehabilitation. The Willis lecture, Stroke, 31(1), 223–230.
23.
KarinB., AlexanderK., LukasZ., SusanM., RobertR., LutzJ., Hubertus J. A. vanH., AndreasM-H. (2011). Virtual Reality for Enhancement of Robot-Assisted Gait Training in Children with Neurological Gait Disorders, J Rehabil Med, 43, 493–499.
24.
KimC. M., EngJ. J. (2003). The relationship of lower-extremity muscle torque to locomotor performance in people with stroke, Phys Ther, 83(1), 49–57.
25.
KwakkelG., KollenB., LindemanE. (2004). Understanding the pattern of functional recovery after stroke: Facts and theories. Restor Neurol Neurosci, 22, 281Y99.
26.
LumP. S., BurgarC. G., ShorP. C.. (2002). Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke, Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 83(7), 952–959.
27.
MayrA., KoflerM., QuirbachE., MatzakH., FröhlichK., SaltuariL. (2007). Prospective, blinded, randomized crossover study of gait rehabilitation in stroke patients using the Lokomat gait orthosis, Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 21, 307–314.
MehrholzJ., PohlM. (2012). Electromechanical-assisted gait training after stroke: A systematic review comparing end-effector and exoskeleton devices, J Rehabil Med, 44, 193–199.
30.
MehrholzJ., WernerC., KuglerJ., PohlM. (2007). Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke, Cochrane Database Syst Rev,, (4) CD006185.
31.
MendelsonD. N., RedfernM. S., NebesR. D., RichardJennings, J. (2009). Inhibitory Processes Relate Differently to Balance/Reaction Time Dual Tasks in Young and Older Adults, Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn, 12, 1–18.
32.
MolinariM., LeggioM. G., De MartinM., CerasaA., ThautM. (2003). Neurobiology of rhythmic motor entrainment, Ann N Y Acad Sci, 999, 313–321.
33.
Nicholas. (1997). Balance retraining after stroke using force platform biofeedback, Phys Ther, 77(5), 553–558.
34.
ParkJ. H., KwonY. C. (1989). Standardization of korean version of the mini-mental state examination(MMSE-K) for use in the elderly, part II, diagnostic validity, J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc, 28(3), 508–513.
35.
PerryJ. (1992). Gait analysis: Normal and pathological function. Thorofare, N J: SLACK.
36.
PatlaA. E., GreigM. (2006). Any way you look at it, successful obstacle negotiation needs visually guided on-line foot placement regulation during the approach phase, Neurosci Lett, 397(1-2), 110–114.
37.
PeltonT. A., JohannsenL., HuiyaC., WingA. M. (2010). Hemiparetic stepping to the beat: Asymmetric response to metronome phase shift during treadmill gait, Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 24(5), 428–434.
38.
PodsiadloD., RichardsonS. (1991). The timed “Up & Go”: A test of functional mobility for frail elderly persons, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 39(22), 142–148basic.
39.
PohlM., MehrholzJ., RitschelC., RuckniemS. (2002). Speed-dependent treadmill training in ambulatory hemiparetic stroke patients: A randomized controlled trial, Stroke, 33(2), 553–558.
40.
ReynoldsR. F., DayB. L. (2005). Visual guidance of the human foot during a ste, J Physiol, 569, 677–684.
41.
RizzoA., BuckwalterJ. (1997). Virtual reality and cognitive assessment and rehabilitation: The state of the art, Stud Health Technol Inform, 44, 123–145.
42.
RizzoA., PairJ., McNerneyP. J., EastlundE., MansonB., GratchJ., . (2005). Development of a VR therapy application for Iraq war military personnel with PTSD, Stud Health Technol Inform, 111, 407–413.
43.
RoerdinkM., LamothC. J., KwakkelG., van WieringenP. C., BeekP. J. (2007). Gait coordination after stroke: Benefits of acoustically paced treadmill walking, Phys Ther, 87(8), 1009–1022.
44.
RothE. J., HeinemannA. W., LovellL. L., HarveyR. L., McGuireJ. R., DiazS. (1997). Inpairment and disability. Their relation during stoke rehabilitation, Arch phys Med Rehabil, 79(3), 329–335.
45.
SchuckA., LabruyereR., ValleryH., RienerR., Duschau-WickeA. (2012). Feasibility and effects of patient cooperative robot aided gait training applied in a 4-week pilot trial, J Neuroeng Rehabil, 9, 31.
46.
Sin-CheolH., Chae-GilL. (2016). The Effects of Robot-Assisted Gait Training with Visual Feedback on Gait, Balance and Balance Confidence in Chronic Stroke Patients, J Kor Phys Ther, 28(2), 71–76.
47.
ThautL., RiceA., KenyonM., . (2007). Rhythmic auditory stimulation improves gait more than NDT/ Bobath training in near-ambulatory patients early poststroke: A single-blind, randomized trial, Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 21(5), 455–459.
48.
ThautM. H., DemartinM., SanesJ. N. (2008). Brain networks for integrative rhythm formation. PLoSOne, 3(5), e2312.
49.
ThautM. H., McIntoshG. C., RiceR. R. (1997). Rhythmic facilitation of gait training in hemiparetic stroke rehabilitation, J Neurol Sci, 151(2), 207–212.
50.
WhitallJ., McCombe WallerS., SilverK. H., MackoR. F. (2000). Repetitive bilateral arm training with rhythmic auditory cueing improves motor function in chronic hemiparetic stroke, Stroke, 31(10), 2390–2395.
51.
WonH. C., Yun-HeeK. (2013). Robot-assisted Therapy in Stroke Rehabilitation, Journal of Stroke, 15(3), 174–181.
52.
WongC. K., BishopL., SteinJ. (2012). A wearable robotic knee orthosis for gait training: A case-series of hemiparetic stroke survivors, Prosthet Orthot Int, 36(1), 113–120.
53.
YangD. J., ParkS. K., KangJ. I., . (2014). Effects of changes in postural alignment on foot pressure and balance of patients with stroke, J Kor Phys Ther, 26(4), 226–33.
54.
YangY. R., TsaiM. P., ChuangT. Y., SungW. H., WangR. Y. (2008). Virtual reality-based training improves community ambulation in individuals with stroke: A rand omized controlled trial, Gait Posture, 28(2), 201–206.
