Robotic exoskeleton Remotion in outpatient gait rehabilitation for young adult patients with cerebral palsy

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Background. Although a significant number of studies have focused on the rehabilitation of children patients with cerebral palsy (CP), the use of restorative treatment in the adult population with this pathology remains understudied. High-technology robot-assisted rehabilitation using exoskeleton systems for gait restoration has proven effective in various neurological disorders, including the rehabilitation of children with CP. However, questions concerning the application of these methods in adult patients require further clarification.

Aim. To investigate the effect of robot-assisted gait training in an exoskeleton in an outpatient setting on mobility, gait speed, and gait biomechanics in adult patients with CP (students of an inclusive university), and to determine the feasibility and effectiveness (i.e., the appropriateness) of outpatient motor rehabilitation using such training for this patient population.

Materials and methods. The study included 11 patients with spastic CP (spastic diplegia), classified as Gross Motor Function Classification System levels II–III. All patients underwent 10 training sessions on the Remotion robotic exoskeleton system (JSC "Volzhsky Electromechanical Plant", Russian Federation) once a day, 5 days a week. Clinical assessment included the timed up and go test and the 10-meter walk test. To objectify the clinical assessment data, biomechanical analysis of cyclic walking was performed using the Biomekhanika Nevrokor system (LLC Nevrokor, Russian Federation).

Results. The study demonstrated a clinically significant improvement in mobility as assessed by the timed up and go test (p < 0.05) and in fast walking speed measured by the 10-meter walk test (p < 0.05). Based on the gait biomechanics analysis, the patients were divided into two groups: a symmetric gait group (n = 5) and an asymmetric gait group (n = 5). In the asymmetric gait group, a statistically significant improvement in step phase symmetry was observed after the rehabilitation course using the Remotion exoskeleton system. These changes occurred due to a reduction in compensatory movements at the hip joint and normalization of the phase characteristics of the flexion/extension angles of the lower limb joints.

Conclusion. The present study confirmed that outpatient motor rehabilitation using robot-assisted therapy with an exoskeleton system is feasible, appropriate, and effective in adult patients with a previously established diagnosis of CP who are continuing their higher education.

About the authors

A. E. Slotina

Russian Center of Neurology and Neurosciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: slotina@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1395-6645
Russian Federation, 80 Volokolamskoe Shosse, Моscow 125367

A. S. Glukhov

Russian Center of Neurology and Neurosciences

Email: glukhov@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0006-1033-9771
Russian Federation, 80 Volokolamskoe Shosse, Моscow 125367

A. N. Ostrovskiy

Russian State University of Social Technologies

Email: ostrovsky@mggeu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5666-658X
Russian Federation, 49 Losinoostrovskaya St., Moscow 107150

K. A. Sargsyan

Hospital of the Centrosoyuz of the Russian Federation

Email: slotina@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3628-2161
Russian Federation, 39 Losinoostrovskaya St., Moscow 107150

L. A. Savin

Russian University of Medicine, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: slotina@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3557-8780
Russian Federation, 4 Dolgorukovskaya St., Moscow 127006

E. S. Ikonnikova

Russian Center of Neurology and Neurosciences

Email: ikonnikova@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6836-4386
Russian Federation, 80 Volokolamskoe Shosse, Моscow 125367

O. A. Kirichenko

Russian Center of Neurology and Neurosciences

Email: kirichenko@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7119-9841
Russian Federation, 80 Volokolamskoe Shosse, Моscow 125367

S. N. Illarioshkin

Russian Center of Neurology and Neurosciences; Russian University of Medicine, Ministry of Health of Russia

Email: illarioshkin@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2704-6282
Russian Federation, 80 Volokolamskoe Shosse, Моscow 125367; 4 Dolgorukovskaya St., Moscow 127006

I. V. Mikhalyov

Russian State University of Social Technologies

Email: slotina@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1725-3114
Russian Federation, 49 Losinoostrovskaya St., Moscow 107150

N. A. Suponeva

Russian Center of Neurology and Neurosciences

Email: suponeva@neurology.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3956-6362
Russian Federation, 80 Volokolamskoe Shosse, Моscow 125367

References

  1. Детский церебральный паралич (ДЦП). Клинические рекомендации. Вестник восстановительной медицины 2017;16(3):91–114. Cerebral palsy. Clinical recommendations. Vestnik vosstanovitelnoy meditsiny = Bulletin of Rehabilitation 2017;16(3):91–114. (In Russ.).
  2. Demont A., Gedda M., Lager C. et al. Implementable motor rehabilitation guidelines for individuals with cerebral palsy. Neurology 2022;16;99(7):283–97. doi: 10.1212/WNL.17.09.2026200936
  3. Шулындин А.В., Антипенко Е.А. Детский церебральный паралич у взрослых: современное состояние проблемы. Неврологический вестник 2017;XLIX(3):64–70. doi: 10.17816/nb14089 Shulyndin A.V., Antipenko E.A. Cerebral palsy in adults. Current state of the problem. Nevrologicheskiy vestnik = Neurology Bulletin 2017;XLIX(3):64–70. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17816/nb14089
  4. Jeglinsky I., Surakka J., Carlberg E.B. et al. Evidence on physiotherapeutic interventions for adults with cerebral palsy is sparse. a systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2010;24(9):771–88. doi: 10.1177/0269215510367969
  5. Andersson C., Grooten W., Hellsten M. et al. Adults with cerebral palsy: walking ability after progressive strength training. Dev Med Child Neurol 2003;45:220–8. doi: 10.1017/s0012162203000446
  6. Eagleton M., Iams A., McDowell J. et al. The effects of strength training on gait in adolescents with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther 2004;16:22–30. doi: 10.1097/01.pep.0000116781.00415.8e
  7. Mehrholz J., Thomas S., Werner C. et al. Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;5(5):CD006185. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub4
  8. Mekki M., Delgado A.D., Fry A. et al. Robotic rehabilitation and spinal cord injury: a narrative review. neurotherapeutics 2018;15(3):604–17. doi: 10.1007/s13311-018-0642-3
  9. Furnari A., Calabro R.S., De Cola M.C. et al. Robotic-assisted gait training in Parkinson’s disease: a three-month follow-up randomized clinical trial. Int J Neurosci 2017;127(11):996–1004. doi: 10.1080/00207454.2017.1288623
  10. Russo M., Dattola V., De Cola M.C. et al. The role of robotic gait training coupled with virtual reality in boosting the rehabilitative outcomes in patients with multiple sclerosis. Int J Rehabil Res 2018;41(2):166–72. doi: 10.1097/MRR.17.09.2026000270
  11. Pool D., Valentine J., Taylor N.F. et al. Locomotor and robotic assistive gait training for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 2021;63(3):328–35. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.14746
  12. Choi J.Y., Kim S.K., Hong J. et al. Overground gait training with a wearable robot in children with cerebral palsy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open 20241;7(7):e2422625. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.22625
  13. Carvalho I., Pinto S.M., Chagas D.D.V. et al. Robotic gait training for individuals with cerebral palsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2017;98(11):2332–44. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.06.018
  14. Klobucká S., Klobucký R., Kollár B. Effect of robot-assisted gait training on motor functions in adolescent and young adult patients with bilateral spastic cerebral palsy: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabilitation 2020;47(4):495–508. doi: 10.3233/NRE-203102
  15. Ueno T., Watanabe H., Kawamoto H. et al. Feasibility and safety of Robot Suit HAL treatment for adolescents and adults with cerebral palsy. J Clin Neurosci 2019;68:101–4. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2019.07.026
  16. Patritti B.L., Straudi S., Deming L.C. et al. Robotic gait training in an adult with cerebral palsy: a case report. PMR 2010;2(1):71–5. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2009.10.012
  17. Podsiadlo D., Richardson S.. The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991;39(2):142–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x
  18. De Baptista C.R.J.A., Vicente A.M., Souza M.A. et al. Methods of 10-meter walk test and repercussions for reliability obtained in typically developing children. Rehabil Res Pract 2020;2020:4209812. doi: 10.1155/2020/4209812
  19. Parkinson A.O., Apps C.L., Morris J.G. et al. The calculation, thresholds and reporting of inter-limb strength asymmetry: a systematic review. J Sports Sci Med 2021;20(4):594–617. doi: 10.52082/jssm.2021.594
  20. Patterson K.K., Gage W.H., Brooks D. et al. Evaluation of gait symmetry after stroke: a comparison of current methods and recommendations for standardization. Gait Posture 2010;31(2):241–6. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.10.014
  21. Conner B.C., Remec N.M., Lerner Z.F. Is robotic gait training effective for individuals with cerebral palsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil 2022;36(7):873–82. doi: 10.1177/02692155221087084
  22. Turk M.A. Health, mortality, and wellness issues in adults with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 2009;51(4):24–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03429.x
  23. Shortland A. Muscle deficits in cerebral palsy and early loss of mobility: can we learn something from our elders? Dev Med Child Neurol 2009;51(4):59–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03434.x
  24. Rose J., McGill K.C. Neuromuscular activation and motor-unit firing characteristics in cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 2005;47:329–36. doi: 10.1017/s0012162205000629
  25. Peterson M.D., Lukasik L., Muth T. et al. Recumbent cross-training is a feasible and safe mode of physical activity for significantly motor-impaired adults with cerebral palsy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2013;94(2):401–7. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.09.027
  26. Tanaka H., Nankaku M., Nishikawa T. et al. Spatiotemporal gait characteristic changes with gait training using the hybrid assistive limb for chronic stroke patients. Gait Posture 2019;71:205–10. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.05.003
  27. Seo J.S., Yang H.S., Jung S. et al. Effect of reducing assistance during robot-assisted gait training on step length asymmetry in patients with hemiplegic stroke: a randomized controlled pilot trial. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018;97(33):e11792. doi: 10.1097/MD.17.09.2026011792
  28. Nedergard H., Arumugam A., Sandlund M. et al. Effect of robotic-assisted gait training on objective biomechanical measures of gait in persons post-stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2021;18(1):64. doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00857-9

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2026 Slotina A.E., Glukhov A.S., Ostrovskiy A.N., Sargsyan K.A., Savin L.A., Ikonnikova E.S., Kirichenko O.A., Illarioshkin S.N., Mikhalyov I.V., Suponeva N.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77-44264 от  25.08.2023.