Effect of Robotic Gait on Functions in Cerebral Palsy
The Effects of Robotic Rehabilitation in Addition to Neurodevelopmental Therapy on Lower Extremity and Trunk Functions in Children With Cerebral Palsy
Visão geral do estudo
Status
Status
Condições
Condições
Intervenção / Tratamento
Intervenção / Tratamento
Tipo de estudo
Tipo de estudo
Inscrição (Real)
Inscrição
Estágio
Estágio
- Não aplicável
Contactos e Locais
Locais de estudo
-
-
Beykoz
-
Istanbul, Beykoz, Turquia (Türkiye), 34810
- Istanbul Medipol University, Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Department
-
-
Critérios de participação
Critérios de elegibilidade
Critérios de elegibilidade
Idades elegíveis para estudo
- Filho
Aceita Voluntários Saudáveis
Descrição
Inclusion Criteria:
- Diagnosed with cerebral palsy
- Classified as Level I-III according to the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS)
- Lower extremity Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) score of 3 or less
- No skin lesions or active skin infections in the lower extremities
- Minimum height of 110 cm
Exclusion Criteria:
- History of lower extremity orthopedic surgery
- History of botulinum toxin type A (BTX-A) injection within the past 6 months
- History of epileptic seizures
- Inability to attend the intervention sessions regularly or maintain study
- Inability to understand and follow simple verbal commands
- Inability to establish and maintain cooperation during assessments and interventionscompliance
Plano de estudo
Como o estudo é projetado?
Detalhes do projeto
- Finalidade Principal: Tratamento
- Alocação: N / D
- Modelo Intervencional: Atribuição de grupo único
- Mascaramento: Nenhum (rótulo aberto)
Número de braços
Armas e Intervenções
Grupo de Participantes / BraçoGrupo de Participantes / Braço |
Intervenção / TratamentoIntervenção / Tratamento |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Single Group: Sequential Conventional Treatment and Experimental Intervention
Participants followed a single-group sequential intervention design.
After baseline assessment (T0), participants received neurodevelopmental treatment (NDT) for 4 weeks (20 sessions, 5/week, 45 min), including weight-shifting exercises, facilitation techniques, sensory stimulation, strengthening, and proprioceptive training.
Assessments were repeated at Week 4 (T1).
After a 2-week washout period, participants underwent a combined intervention of NDT (20 min) and robotic rehabilitation (RB, 25 min) for 4 weeks (20 sessions, 5/week).
RB was performed using the LokoHelp Gait Trainer, a body-weight-supported treadmill system enabling gait training with adjustable speed and incline based on tolerance.
Final assessments were conducted at Week 10 (T2).
|
Neurodevelopmental treatment (NDT) was applied as a conventional physiotherapy program focusing on facilitating normal movement patterns and improving postural control.
Each session lasted 45 minutes and included weight-shifting exercises in crawling, sitting, kneeling, and standing positions; facilitation techniques; proprioceptive, auditory, and visual stimulation; isolated strengthening exercises for upper and lower extremities; and proprioceptive training.
The intervention was delivered 5 times per week for 4 weeks (total of 20 sessions).
Robotic rehabilitation (RB) was administered using the LokoHelp Gait Trainer, a body-weight-supported treadmill system designed for locomotor training.
The device enables gait practice with appropriate posture and movement patterns without continuous manual assistance.
Each session included 25 minutes of robotic-assisted gait training, with speed and incline adjusted according to participant tolerance.
RB was applied 5 times per week for 4 weeks (total of 20 sessions) in combination with neurodevelopmental treatment.
|
O que o estudo está medindo?
Medidas de resultados primários
Medidas de resultados primários
Medida de resultado |
Descrição da medida |
Prazo |
|---|---|---|
|
Selective Control Assessment of the Lower Extremity (SCALE)
Prazo: Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
Selective motor control was assessed using the Selective Control Assessment of the Lower Extremity (SCALE).
SCALE evaluates selective voluntary motor control of the hip, knee, ankle, subtalar, and toe joints bilaterally.
Participants were instructed to perform each movement within 3 seconds.
Each joint was scored based on performance as follows: normal selective motor control (2 points), impaired selective motor control (1 point), and inability to perform selective motor control (0 points).
The total score was calculated by summing the scores of all joints.
The maximum possible score is 20 points (10 points for each extremity), and the minimum score is 0. Higher scores indicate better selective motor control.
|
Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
|
The Seated Postural Control Measure (SPCM)
Prazo: Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
Seated postural control was assessed using the Seated Postural Control Measure (SPCM).
The scale evaluates postural alignment and functional performance in the sitting position.
It consists of three sections: demographic information, postural alignment during sitting, and upper extremity function.
Postural deviations are rated on a 4-point scale (1 = poor, 4 = good), with higher scores indicating better postural control.
The maximum score is 88 for the postural alignment section and 48 for the upper extremity function section.
|
Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
Medidas de resultados secundários
Medidas de resultados secundários
Medida de resultado |
Descrição da medida |
Prazo |
|---|---|---|
|
Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM-88)
Prazo: Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
Gross motor function was assessed using the Gross Motor Function Measure-88 (GMFM-88).
The scale consists of 88 items grouped into five domains: lying and rolling (17 items), sitting (20 items), crawling and kneeling (14 items), standing (13 items), and walking, running, and jumping (24 items).
It is used to evaluate and classify functional motor abilities in children with motor impairments.
Each item is scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 0 to 3. The maximum possible score is 264, and the minimum score is 0. Higher scores indicate better gross motor function and greater levels of functional independence.
|
Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
|
Trunk Control Measurement Scale (TCMS)
Prazo: Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
Trunk control was assessed using the Trunk Control Measurement (TCMS), which evaluates both static and dynamic sitting balance.
The scale consists of two main domains subdivided into three sections with a total of 15 items.
It includes two items assessing static sitting balance and one domain assessing dynamic sitting balance parameters.
The total score ranges from 0 to 58, with higher scores indicating better trunk control.
Assessments were performed with children seated in a standardized position (hips and knees in 90° flexion, feet in contact with the ground, and without back support).
|
Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
|
Time Up and Go Test (TUG)
Prazo: Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
Functional mobility, gait speed, postural balance, and dynamic stability were assessed using the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test.
Participants were instructed to stand up from a standard chair, walk 3 meters, turn around, walk back to the chair, and sit down again.
The total time required to complete the task was recorded in seconds.
The test was performed twice, and the best performance was used for analysis.
Higher completion time indicates poorer functional mobility and balance performance.
|
Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
|
Becure Balance System
Prazo: Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
Static balance was assessed using a computerized balance platform system providing objective postural stability data.
Participants stood on a balance board in a double-leg stance for 30 seconds under two conditions: eyes open and eyes closed.
The system recorded center of pressure (CoP) displacement in the X-Y plane and postural sway area during standing.
Outcome variables included postural sway parameters reflecting static balance control.
Higher sway values indicate poorer postural stability.
|
Baseline (T0), after 4 weeks of NDT intervention (fourth week - T1) and after 4 weeks of NDT+RB intervention (tenth week - T2)
|
Colaboradores e Investigadores
Patrocinador
Patrocinador
Publicações e links úteis
Publicações Gerais
- El-Shamy SM, Abd El Kafy EM. Effect of balance training on postural balance control and risk of fall in children with diplegic cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil. 2014;36(14):1176-83. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2013.833312. Epub 2013 Sep 13.
- Carvalho I, Pinto SM, Chagas DDV, Praxedes Dos Santos JL, de Sousa Oliveira T, Batista LA. Robotic Gait Training for Individuals With Cerebral Palsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Nov;98(11):2332-2344. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.06.018. Epub 2017 Jul 24.
- Gulzar A, Waris M; Qurat Ul Ain. Effects of 8 weeks functional training programme on posture control and functional mobility in spastic hemiplegic cerebral palsy. J Pak Med Assoc. 2022 Jul;72(7):1278-1281. doi: 10.47391/JPMA.3476.
- Wu YN, Hwang M, Ren Y, Gaebler-Spira D, Zhang LQ. Combined passive stretching and active movement rehabilitation of lower-limb impairments in children with cerebral palsy using a portable robot. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011 May;25(4):378-85. doi: 10.1177/1545968310388666. Epub 2011 Feb 22.
- Ammann-Reiffer C, Bastiaenen CHG, Meyer-Heim AD, van Hedel HJA. Lessons learned from conducting a pragmatic, randomized, crossover trial on robot-assisted gait training in children with cerebral palsy (PeLoGAIT). J Pediatr Rehabil Med. 2020;13(2):137-148. doi: 10.3233/PRM-190614.
- Klobucka, S., Ziakova, E., & Klobucky, R. (2015). P178-2253: The effect of age on the improvement in motor function in patients with cerebral palsy after undergoing robotic-assisted locomotor therapy. European Journal of Paediatric Neurology, 19, S143-S144.
- Tarakcı, D., Emir, A., Avcıl, E., & Tarakcı, E. (2019). Effect of robot assisted gait training on motor performance in cerebral palsy: a pilot study. Journal of Exercise Therapy and Rehabilitation, 6(3), 156-162.
- Molteni F, Gasperini G, Cannaviello G, Guanziroli E. Exoskeleton and End-Effector Robots for Upper and Lower Limbs Rehabilitation: Narrative Review. PM R. 2018 Sep;10(9 Suppl 2):S174-S188. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2018.06.005.
- Llamas-Ramos R, Sanchez-Gonzalez JL, Llamas-Ramos I. Robotic Systems for the Physiotherapy Treatment of Children with Cerebral Palsy: A Systematic Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 22;19(9):5116. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19095116.
- Labaf S, Shamsoddini A, Hollisaz MT, Sobhani V, Shakibaee A. Effects of Neurodevelopmental Therapy on Gross Motor Function in Children with Cerebral Palsy. Iran J Child Neurol. 2015 Spring;9(2):36-41.
- Sadowska M, Sarecka-Hujar B, Kopyta I. Cerebral Palsy: Current Opinions on Definition, Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Classification and Treatment Options. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2020 Jun 12;16:1505-1518. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S235165. eCollection 2020.
- Reid SM, Modak MB, Berkowitz RG, Reddihough DS. A population-based study and systematic review of hearing loss in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011 Nov;53(11):1038-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2011.04069.x. Epub 2011 Sep 6.
Links úteis
Datas de registro do estudo
Datas Principais do Estudo
Início do estudo (Real)
Início do estudo
Conclusão Primária (Real)
Conclusão Primária
Conclusão do estudo (Real)
Conclusão do estudo
Datas de inscrição no estudo
Enviado pela primeira vez
Enviado pela primeira vez
Enviado pela primeira vez que atendeu aos critérios de CQ
Enviado pela primeira vez que atendeu aos critérios de CQ
Primeira postagem (Real)
Primeira postagem
Atualizações de registro de estudo
Última Atualização Postada (Real)
Última Atualização Postada
Última atualização enviada que atendeu aos critérios de controle de qualidade
Última atualização enviada que atendeu aos critérios de controle de qualidade
Última verificação
Última verificação
Mais Informações
Termos relacionados a este estudo
Palavras-chave
Termos MeSH relevantes adicionais
Outros números de identificação do estudo
Outros números de identificação do estudo
- E-10840098-772.02-6173
Plano para dados de participantes individuais (IPD)
Planeja compartilhar dados de participantes individuais (IPD)?
Descrição do plano IPD
Informações sobre medicamentos e dispositivos, documentos de estudo
Estuda um medicamento regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA
Estuda um produto de dispositivo regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA
Essas informações foram obtidas diretamente do site clinicaltrials.gov sem nenhuma alteração. Se você tiver alguma solicitação para alterar, remover ou atualizar os detalhes do seu estudo, entre em contato com register@clinicaltrials.gov. Assim que uma alteração for implementada em clinicaltrials.gov, ela também será atualizada automaticamente em nosso site .