Robot-assisted locomotor training in incomplete SCI
lance were found, but not in walking function. As the
study was underpowered, it cannot be excluded that
RALT may have some, although modest, effects on
this subject group. The fact that both manual (13) and
the present robot-assisted RCT gave such small gains
among subjects with chronic incomplete SCI, suggests
that the treatment effects are limited and cost-benefit
low when baseline function is poor and training starts
late in subjects with incomplete SCI.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital at Nesodden, Nor-
way, for recruiting patients. We appreciate the cooperation of
the patients’ organizations LARS (National association of the
spinal cord injured) and LTN (National association of the traf-
fic injured). The efforts of the physical therapists and others
who guided the robot-assisted locomotor training are highly
appreciated. Finally, we could not have performed this study
without the excellent testing team at Sunnaas.
The study was funded by the Norwegian Health Authorities
and the Norwegian Health and Rehabilitation funds. Gjensidige
insurance company donated the LOKOMAT® gait training robot.
The authors have no conflicts of interests declare.
1. Wirz M, Zemon DH, Rupp R, Scheel A, Colombo G, Dietz
V, et al. Effectiveness of automated locomotor training in
patients with chronic incomplete spinal cord injury: a mul-
ticenter trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 672–680.
2. Hornby G, Campbell D, Zemon D, Kahn J. Clinical and
quantitative evaluation of robotic-assisted treadmill
walking to retrain ambulation after spinal cord injury.
Topics Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2005; 11: 1–17.
3. Alcobendas-Maestro M, Esclarín-Ruz A, Casado-López RM,
Muñoz-González A, Pérez-Mateos G, González-Valdizán E,
et al. Lokomat robotic-assisted versus overground training
within 3 to 6 months of incomplete spinal cord lesion:
randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair
2012; 26: 1058–1063.
4. Esclarín-Ruz A, Alcobendas-Maestro M, Casado-Lopez R,
Perez-Mateos G, Florido-Sanchez MA, Gonzalez-Valdizan
E, et al. A comparison of robotic walking therapy and con-
ventional walking therapy in individuals with upper versus
lower motor neuron lesions: a randomized controlled trial.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2014; 95: 1023–1031.
5. Niu X, Varoqui D, Kindig M, Mirbagheri MM. Prediction of
gait recovery in spinal cord injured individuals trained with
robotic gait orthosis. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2014; 11: 42.
6. Varoqui D, Niu X, Mirbagheri MM. Ankle voluntary move-
ment enhancement following robotic-assisted locomotor
training in spinal cord injury. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2014;
11: 46.
7. Duffel DL, Brown GL, Mirbagheri MM. Interventions to re-
duce spasticity and improve function in people with chronic
incomplete spinal cord injury: distinctions revealed by
different analytical methods. Neurorehabil Neural Repair
2015; 29: 566–576.
8. Cheung EYY, Ng TKW, Yu KKK, Kwan RLC, Cheing GLY.
Robot-assisted training for people with spinal cord
injury: a meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2017;
98: 2320–2331.
9. Gorman PH, Scott W, York H, Theyagaraj M, Price-Miller
N, McQuaid J et al. Robotically assisted treadmill exercise
training for improving peak fitness in chronic motor in-
complete spinal cord injury: a randomized controlled trial.
J Spinal Cord Med 2016; 39: 32–44.
10. Mirbagheri MM, Kindig MW, Niu X. Effects of robotic-
locomotor training on stretch reflex function and muscu-
lar properties in individuals with spinal cord injury. Clin
Neurophysiol 2015; 126: 997–1006.
11. Field-Fote EC, Roach KE. Influence of a locomotor training
approach on walking speed and distance in people with
chronic spinal cord injury: a randomized clinical trial. Phys
Ther 2011; 91: 48–60.
12. Kirshblum S, Millis S, McKinley W, Tulsky D. Late neurologic
recovery after traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med
Rehabil 2004; 85: 1811–1817.
13. Piira A, Lannem AM, Sørensen M, Glott T, Knutsen R,
Jørgensen L et al. Manually assisted body-weight sup-
ported locomotor training does not re-establish walking in
non-walking subjects with chronic incomplete spinal cord
injury: a randomized clinical trial. J Rehabil Med 2019;
51: 113–119.
14. Waters RL, Adkins R, Yakura J, Vigil D. Prediction of am-
bulatory performance based on motor scores derived from
standards of the American Spinal Injury Association. Arch
Phys Med Rehabil 1994; 75: 756–760.
15. Sandler EB, Roach KE, Field-Fote EC. Dose-response
outcomes associated with different forms of locomotor
training in persons with chronic motor-incomplete spinal
cord injury. J Neurotrauma 2017; 34: 1903–1908.
REFERENCES
389
J Rehabil Med 51, 2019