Exploiting telerobotics for sensorimotor rehabilitation: a locomotor embodiment.
Min Hyong Koh, Sheng-Che Yen, Lester Y Leung and 5 others
PMID 33882949WHAT IT FOUND
A telerobotics system let trainers assist stroke survivors' gait remotely.
Six patients completed the protocol, showing swing length improvements in most, but the primary Day 1 to Day 6 change did not reach statistical significance. The study confirms feasibility, not efficacy.
Key findings
01The primary outcome, the increase in unassisted swing length from Day 1 to Day 6, averaged 20% but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.058).
02When looking at each patient's best day rather than the final day, the average increase in swing length was 39% and was statistically significant (p = 0.031).
03All six patients successfully completed the 6-day training protocol, and five of six showed larger swing lengths on the last day compared to the first.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Very small sample size (n=6) limits statistical power and generalizability. The primary outcome (Day 1 vs Day 6 change) was not statistically significant; significance was only found when selecting the 'best day', which is a post-hoc analysis. Trainers were investigators, not licensed clinicians, so it is unknown how professional therapists would interact with the system. No control group was used, so improvements cannot be separated from natural recovery, practice effects, or the exercise itself. The study was designed for feasibility, not efficacy, and included patients with widely varying impairments.
Declared interests
Funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences and Northeastern University. No commercial conflicts of interest are reported in the text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the 39% increase in swing length as proof that this system works. This figure comes from comparing Day 1 to each patient's best day, which is not the primary outcome. The primary comparison of Day 1 to Day 6 showed a 20% increase that was not statistically significant (p = 0.058).