Body Weight Support Devices for Overground Gait and Balance Training

Pennycott, Andrew

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-08995-4_33

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, BWS devices have developed from stationary, treadmill-coupled devices to more elaborate mobile and ceiling-mounted systems with multiple degrees of freedom that can be used during overground walking [15]. The current developments in BWS devices accompany the trend towards promoting active participation in training and providing assist-as-needed based on patient-specific requirements [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical indications and protocol considerations for selecting initial body weight support levels in gait rehabilitation: a systematic review

Ettema,

Pennink,

Buurke

et al. 2024

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Body weight support (BWS) training devices are frequently used to improve gait in individuals with neurological impairments, but guidance in selecting an appropriate level of BWS is limited. Here, we aim to describe the initial BWS levels used during gait training, the rationale for this selection and the clinical goals aligned with BWS training for different diagnoses. Method A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science, including terms related to the population (individuals with neurological disorders), intervention (BWS training) and outcome (gait). Information on patient characteristics, type of BWS device, BWS level and training goals was extracted from the included articles. Results Thirty-three articles were included, which described outcomes using frame-based (stationary or mobile) and unidirectional ceiling-mounted devices on four diagnoses (multiple sclerosis (MS), spinal cord injury (SCI), stroke, traumatic brain injury (TBI)). The BWS levels were highest for individuals with MS (median: 75%, IQR: 6%), followed by SCI (median: 40%, IQR: 35%), stroke (median: 30%, IQR: 4.75%) and TBI (median: 15%, IQR: 0%). The included studies reported eleven different training goals. Reported BWS levels ranged between 30 and 75% for most of the training goals, without a clear relationship between BWS level, diagnosis, training goal and rationale for BWS selection. Training goals were achieved in all included studies. Conclusion Initial BWS levels differ considerably between studies included in this review. The underlying rationale for these differences was not clearly motivated in the included studies. Variation in study designs and populations does not allow to draw a conclusion on the effectiveness of BWS levels. Hence, it remains difficult to formulate guidelines on optimal BWS settings for different diagnoses, BWS devices and training goals. Further efforts are required to establish clinical guidelines and to experimentally investigate which initial BWS levels are optimal for specific diagnoses and training goals.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%