End-effector (EE) and exoskeleton (Exo) robots have not been directly compared previously. The present study aimed to directly compare EE and Exo robots in chronic stroke patients with moderate-to-severe upper limb impairment. This single-blinded, randomised controlled trial included 38 patients with stroke who were admitted to the rehabilitation hospital. The patients were equally divided into EE and Exo groups. Baseline characteristics, including sex, age, stroke type, brain lesion side (left/right), stroke duration, Fugl–Meyer Assessment (FMA)–Upper Extremity score, and Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) score, were assessed. Additionally, impairment level (FMA, motor status score), activity (WMFT), and participation (stroke impact scale [SIS]) were evaluated. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. After the intervention, improvements were significantly better in the EE group with regard to activity and participation (WMFT–Functional ability rating scale, WMFT–Time, and SIS–Participation). There was no intervention-related adverse event. The EE robot intervention is better than the Exo robot intervention with regard to activity and participation among chronic stroke patients with moderate-to-severe upper limb impairment. Further research is needed to confirm this novel finding.

Detecting neuroplastic changes during locomotor neurorehabilitation is crucial for independent primal motor behaviours. However, long-term locomotor training-related neuroplasticity remains unexplored. We compared the effects of end-effector robot-assisted gait training (E-RAGT) and bodyweight-supported treadmill training (BWST) on cortical activation in individuals with hemiparetic stroke. Twenty-three men and five women aged 53.2 ± 11.2 years were recruited and randomly assigned to participate in E-RAGT (n = 14) or BWST (n = 14) for 30 min/day, 5 days/week, for 4 weeks. Cortical activity, lower limb motor function, and gait speed were evaluated before and after training. Activation of the primary sensorimotor cortex, supplementary motor area, and premotor cortex in the affected hemisphere significantly increased only in the E-RAGT group, although there were no significant between-group differences. Clinical outcomes, including the Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA), timed up and go test, and 10-m walk test scores, improved after training in both groups, with significantly better FMA scores in the E-RAGT group than in the BWST group. These findings suggest that E-RAGT effectively improves neuroplastic outcomes in hemiparetic stroke, although its superiority over conventional training remains unclear. This may have clinical implications and provides insight for clinicians interested in locomotor neurorehabilitation after hemiparetic stroke. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04054739 (12/08/2019).

Background Robotic rehabilitation of stroke survivors with upper extremity dysfunction may yield different outcomes depending on the robot type. Considering that excessive dependence on assistive force by robotic actuators may interfere with the patient’s active learning and participation, we hypothesised that the use of an active-assistive robot with robotic actuators does not lead to a more meaningful difference with respect to upper extremity rehabilitation than the use of a passive robot without robotic actuators. Accordingly, we aimed to evaluate the differences in the clinical and kinematic outcomes between active-assistive and passive robotic rehabilitation among stroke survivors. Methods In this single-blinded randomised controlled pilot trial, we assigned 20 stroke survivors with upper extremity dysfunction (Medical Research Council scale score, 3 or 4) to the active-assistive robotic intervention (ACT) and passive robotic intervention (PSV) groups in a 1:1 ratio and administered 20 sessions of 30-min robotic intervention (5 days/week, 4 weeks). The primary (Wolf Motor Function Test [WMFT]-score and -time: measures activity), and secondary (Fugl-Meyer Assessment [FMA] and Stroke Impact Scale [SIS] scores: measure impairment and participation, respectively; kinematic outcomes) outcome measures were determined at baseline, after 2 and 4 weeks of the intervention, and 4 weeks after the end of the intervention. Furthermore, we evaluated the usability of the robots through interviews with patients, therapists, and physiatrists. Results In both the groups, the WMFT-score and -time improved over the course of the intervention. Time had a significant effect on the WMFT-score and -time, FMA-UE, FMA-prox, and SIS-strength; group × time interaction had a significant effect on SIS-function and SIS-social participation (all, p < 0.05). The PSV group showed better improvement in participation and smoothness than the ACT group. In contrast, the ACT group exhibited better improvement in mean speed. Conclusions There were no differences between the two groups regarding the impairment and activity domains. However, the PSV robots were more beneficial than ACT robots regarding participation and smoothness. Considering the high cost and complexity of ACT robots, PSV robots might be more suitable for rehabilitation in stroke survivors capable of voluntary movement. Trial registration The trial was registered retrospectively on 14 March 2018 at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03465267).