| Popis: |
Background: Gait disorders and as a consequence, robotic rehabilitation techniques are becoming increasingly prevalent as the population ages. In the area of rehabilitation robotics, using lightweight single hip joint exoskeletons are of significance. Considering no prior systematic review article on clinical outcomes, we aim to systematically review powered hip exoskeletons in terms of gait parameters and metabolic expenditure effects. Methods: Three databases of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of science were searched for clinical articles comparing outcomes of gait rehabilitation using hip motorized exoskeleton with conventional methods, on patients with gait disorder or healthy individuals. Of total number of 37 reviewed articles, 14 trials were quantitatively analyzed. Analyses performed in terms of gait spatiotemporal parameters like speed (self-speed and maximum speed), step length, stride length, cadence, and oxygen consumption. Results: Improved clinical outcomes of gait spatiotemporal parameters with hip joint exoskeletons are what our review's findings show. In terms of gait values, meta-analysis indicates that rehabilitation with single hip joint exoskeleton enhanced parameters of max speed (P = 0.018) and stride length (P = 0.01). Subgroup analysis showed that cadence improved among healthy elderly people (P = 0.050). For the remaining investigated gait parameters, no statistically significant difference was observed. Regarding metabolic parameters, oxygen consumption was lower in individuals treated with hip exoskeleton (P = 0.007). Conclusion: Although the analysis demonstrated improvement with just specific gait measures utilizing powered hip exoskeletons, the lack of improvement in all parameters is likely caused by the high patient condition heterogeneity among the evaluated articles. We also noted in patients who rehabilitated with the hip exoskeleton, the oxygen cost was lower. More randomized controlled trials are needed to verify both the short- and long-term clinical outcomes, including patient-reported measures. Level of evidence: Level I (systematic review and meta-analysis) |
