↓ Skip to main content

Effects of a wearable exoskeleton stride management assist system (SMA®) on spatiotemporal gait characteristics in individuals after stroke: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
150 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
477 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of a wearable exoskeleton stride management assist system (SMA®) on spatiotemporal gait characteristics in individuals after stroke: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12984-015-0062-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolyn Buesing, Gabriela Fisch, Megan O’Donnell, Ida Shahidi, Lauren Thomas, Chaithanya K. Mummidisetty, Kenton J. Williams, Hideaki Takahashi, William Zev Rymer, Arun Jayaraman

Abstract

Robots offer an alternative, potentially advantageous method of providing repetitive, high-dosage, and high-intensity training to address the gait impairments caused by stroke. In this study, we compared the effects of the Stride Management Assist (SMA®) System, a new wearable robotic device developed by Honda R&D Corporation, Japan, with functional task specific training (FTST) on spatiotemporal gait parameters in stroke survivors. A single blinded randomized control trial was performed to assess the effect of FTST and task-specific walking training with the SMA® device on spatiotemporal gait parameters. Participants (n = 50) were randomly assigned to FTST or SMA. Subjects in both groups received training 3 times per week for 6-8 weeks for a maximum of 18 training sessions. The GAITRite® system was used to collect data on subjects' spatiotemporal gait characteristics before training (baseline), at mid-training, post-training, and at a 3-month follow-up. After training, significant improvements in gait parameters were observed in both training groups compared to baseline, including an increase in velocity and cadence, a decrease in swing time on the impaired side, a decrease in double support time, an increase in stride length on impaired and non-impaired sides, and an increase in step length on impaired and non-impaired sides. No significant differences were observed between training groups; except for SMA group, step length on the impaired side increased significantly during self-selected walking speed trials and spatial asymmetry decreased significantly during fast-velocity walking trials. SMA and FTST interventions provided similar, significant improvements in spatiotemporal gait parameters; however, the SMA group showed additional improvements across more parameters at various time points. These results indicate that the SMA® device could be a useful therapeutic tool to improve spatiotemporal parameters and contribute to improved functional mobility in stroke survivors. Further research is needed to determine the feasibility of using this device in a home setting vs a clinic setting, and whether such home use provides continued benefits. This study is registered under the title "Development of walk assist device to improve community ambulation" and can be located in clinicaltrials.gov with the study identifier: NCT01994395 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 477 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hong Kong 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 471 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 81 17%
Student > Bachelor 57 12%
Researcher 56 12%
Student > Master 54 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 4%
Other 67 14%
Unknown 145 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 109 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 60 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 46 10%
Neuroscience 28 6%
Sports and Recreations 17 4%
Other 50 10%
Unknown 167 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 June 2020.
All research outputs
#17,286,934
of 25,383,225 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#934
of 1,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,197
of 273,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#15
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,383,225 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,408 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 273,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.