Parkinson DiseaseEkso_PDNCT04778852
Quantitative Assessment of Training Effects Using EKSOGT Exoskeleton in Quantitative Assessment of Training Effects Using EKSOGT Exoskeleton in Parkinson Disease Patients
A study testing Experimental: EksoGT and Functional kinematic training in people with Parkinson Disease, run by University of Padova at 2 sites in Italy.
Trial summary
The ability to walk independently is a primary goal when rehabilitating an individual with Parkinson Disease (PD). Indeed, PD patients display a flexed posture that coupled with an excessive joint stiffness lead to a poor walking mechanics that increase their risk of falls. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 to 90 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Parkinson Disease
- What is being tested?
- Experimental: EksoGT and Functional kinematic training
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 50 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesItaly
- Study dates
- 12 Jun 2020to 31 Dec 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 20 to 90 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patient with rigid-acinetic bilateral PD form
- Hoehn-Yahr between 3-4
- At least 4 years of disease history
- Stable drug therapy response without any change performed in the 3 months before the study
- Presence of freezing (FOG) and of postural instability not responding to parkinsonian therapy
- Mini Mental State Evaluation > 24/30
Who cannot join
- Systemic illness
- Presence of cardiac pacemaker
- Postural abnormalities, orthopedic comorbidities that do not match the active physiotherapy treatment
- Presence of deep brain stimulation
- Presence of severe disautonomia with marked hypotension
- Obsessive-Compulsive disorder (OCD)
Show all 11Show fewer
- Major depression
- Dementia and psychosis
- History or active neoplasia
- Pregnancy
- Other criteria that do not respect the device counterindications
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
Italy2 sites, 2 recruiting
- Recruiting
University of Padova
Padova, 35128
zimi sawacha, PhD, +39 0498277633, zimi.sawacha@dei.unipd.it
marco romanato, MSEng, +39 0498277805, romanato@dei.unipd.it
- Recruiting
Fresco Parkinson Center, Villa Margherita
Vicenza, 36057
Daniele Volpe, MD, daniele.volpe@casadicuravillamargherita.it
About this study
Official title: Quantitative Assessment of Training Effects Using a Wearable Exoskeleton in Parkinson Disease Patients
The ability to walk independently is a primary goal when rehabilitating an individual with Parkinson Disease (PD). Indeed, PD patients display a flexed posture that coupled with an excessive joint stiffness lead to a poor walking mechanics that increase their risk of falls. Although studies have already shown the many benefits of robotic-assisted gait training in PD patients, research focusing on optimal rehabilitation methods has been directed towards powered lower-limb exoskeleton. Combining the advantages delivered from the grounded devices with the ability to train in a real-world environment, these systems provide a greater level of subject participation and increase subject's functional abilities while the wearable robotic system guarantees less support. The purpose of the present work is to evaluate the effects of an Over-ground Wearable Exoskeleton Training (OWET) on gait impairments in comparison with a multidisciplinary intensive rehabilitation treatment. As gait is a complex task that involves both central (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems (PNS), targeted rehabilitation must restore not only gait mechanics (ST parameters) but also physiological gait pattern (joint kinematics and dynamics). To this aim the impact of OWET on both CNS and PNS will be evaluated. Thus, a quantitative assessment of an individual's gait and neuromuscular function to robustly evaluate recovery of altered sensorimotor function at both the PNS and CNS is proposed. To this aim, comprehensive GA (spatiotemporal (ST) parameter, joint kinematics, joint stiffness) and electromyography (EMG) will be combined to determine PNS improvements, and fMRI with EEG will be used to assess CNS improvements.
Read the detailed description
Full Title: QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF TRAINING EFFECTS USING A WEARABLE EXOSKELETON IN PARKINSON DISEASE PATIENTS
RESEARCH PLAN
Specific Aims
The ability to walk independently is a primary goal when rehabilitating an individual with Parkinson Disease (PD). Indeed, PD patients display a flexed posture that coupled with an excessive joint stiffness lead to a poor walking mechanics that increase their risk of falls. Although studies have already shown the many benefits of robotic-assisted gait training in PD patients, research focusing on optimal rehabilitation methods has been directed towards powered lower-limb exoskeleton. Combining the advantages delivered from the grounded devices with the ability to train in a real-world environment, these systems provide a greater level of subject participation and increase subject's functional abilities while the wearable robotic system guarantees less support. The purpose of the proposed work is to evaluate the effects of an Over-ground Wearable Exoskeleton Training (OWET) on gait impairments in comparison with a multidisciplinary intensive rehabilitation treatment. As gait is a complex task that involves both central (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems (PNS), targeted rehabilitation must restore not only gait mechanics (ST parameters) but also physiological gait pattern (joint kinematics and dynamics). To this aim the impact of OWET on both CNS and PNS will be evaluated. Human movement analysis quantitatively assesses the neuromuscular and biomechanical features of movement. Recent literature has highlighted the benefit of coupling gait analysis (GA) and neuromusculoskeletal modeling (NMSM) for treatment planning and supplementing this approach with robotic rehabilitation. Another stalwart of PD research has been electroencephalography (EEG), which is widely used to evaluate executive dysfunction while functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) can detect cortical changes in motor activations during motor tasks. Thus, a quantitative assessment of an individual's gait and neuromuscular function to robustly evaluate recovery of altered sensorimotor function at both the PNS and CNS is proposed. To this aim, comprehensive GA (spatiotemporal (ST) parameter, joint kinematics, joint stiffness) and electromyography (EMG) will be combined to determine PNS improvements, and fMRI with EEG will be used to assess CNS improvements. As health care professionals and researchers need objective, reliable, and valid tools to plan subject-specific interventions, quantify therapeutic outcomes, and monitor change over time, the proposed study includes estimation of neutrally-informed muscle forces and joint stiffness, which is expected to provide sensitive determinants of PD movement control that could be crucial to inform treatment planning/assessment. Preliminary data are available and showed feasibility of the proposed measurement set up.
Background OWET: Although studies have already shown the many benefits of robotic-assisted gait training in PD patients (i.e. body weight supported treadmill training) as improving gait efficiency modifying spatiotemporal (ST) parameters, these strategies create an environment where the patient has less control over the gait initiation and lacks in variability of visuospatial flow. Therefore, research focusing on optimal rehabilitation methods has been directed towards powered lower-limb exoskeleton, as in post-stroke rehabilitation, where the effect of such a treatment dramatically enhanced potential for patient-specific rehabilitation, showing improvement in ST parameters. Combining the advantages delivered from the grounded robotic devices with the ability to train the patient in a real-world environment, these systems provide a greater level of subject participation for maintaining trunk and balance control, as well as navigating their path over different surfaces and increase subject's functional abilities while the wearable robotic system guarantees less support. Furthermore, the stability the exoskeleton addresses to the patient, allows a hands-free walking trial (with no clutches) which represents an integral part for a physiological locomotion restoration.
As gait involves both CNS and PNS, targeted rehabilitation must restore not only mechanics (speed, stride time and length) but also physiological gait pattern. This requires improvements at the level of both balance and lower limb joint motion. In this direction, wearable lower-limb powered exoskeletons promote functional training in a realistic walking-environment combined with a greater patient's engagement than in grounded devices. Human movement analysis quantitatively assesses the neuromuscular and biomechanical features of movement. Recent literature has highlighted the benefit of coupling GA and NMSM for treatment planning and supplementing this approach with robotic rehabilitation, however there is no study investigating gait effects from an OWET in those with PD, and no assessment that uses comprehensive GA and NMSM to reveal mechanistic changes as a result of therapy.
Neurophysiology of PD: A stalwart of PD research has been EEG, which is widely used to evaluate executive dysfunction while fMRI can detect cortical changes in motor activations during motor tasks. The protocol to use GA in combination with fMRI has already been adopted by the investigators in order to display the impacts of the rehabilitation process on the reorganization of the neural network, describing and quantifying the neural activity and the recovery after the treatment.
Motion analysis in PD: Gait in people with PD has been thoroughly studied with 3D GA systems in recent years, documenting a typical hypokinetic gait reduction of the stride-length with asymmetry between the strides, an increment of the cadence, the stance and double support phases, which compensates for the reduced stride length.
NMSM: Combining GA and NMSM enables one to track disease progression with enhanced precision. This has been demonstrated across a range of neuromuscular pathologies and healthy individuals. Critically, for each individual a neuromusculoskeletal model is created, driven by the individual's own EMG signals, and tracking their biomechanics, as has recently applied in neurologically impaired individuals. This creates a novel model that links in vivo neuromuscular functions to the individual, thus providing new biomarkers to assess and track PD motor impairment. Furthermore, since joint stiffness depends both on neural recruitment and mechanical properties, it is likely to provide a potent representation of neural and musculoskeletal PD impairment.
Significance and potential impact This project addresses the potential for OWET to restore normal gait in PD patients. OWET aims to improve overall body motion and lower joint stiffness in those with PD, thereby improving function, quality of life, and reducing risk of injurious falls. The proposed robotic device (Ekso GT™, EksoBionics, Richmond, CA, USA) relies functions by providing passive assistance to the ankle joint, which affects the rest of the body through mechanical coupling. Currently, the amount of device assistance is estimated based on a therapist experience and expertise. Modern motion analysis methods enable us to objectively assess the required assistance providing a means to tailor the assistance to each individual and remove the risks of clinical guesswork. Robotic devices assist the physical therapist by providing task-specific repeatable mechanical action to support therapies and enable higher intensity of training. OWET aims to reduce lower limb joint stiffness, which is a recognized biomarker of PD, thereby enhancing rehabilitation for PD patients.
Findings linked with the proposed study will likely give substantial solutions to the management of gait and postural disorders (posture, balance, and gait) in PD where valid interventions (pharmacological, neurosurgery, traditional physiotherapy) are lacking. Moreover, a NMSM that identifies patient-specific variables for therapy could be used to assess treatment outcomes but also to conduct on-line rehabilitation therapy by means remote control of the assistive device. This will provide a number of advantages over conventional approaches proposing an active treatment that is personalized and scalable to large populations and including a standardized training environment and an adaptable support that has the ability to increase the treatment intensity and dose, without being a burden on therapists. OWET is thus an ideal means to complete conventional therapy in clinic, while rehabilitation robots bear the potential for continued home therapy using simpler devices.
Study design The study will be carried out over 36 months. Patients with clinically established diagnosis of PD according to the U.K. Parkinson's Disease Society Brain Bank Diagnostic criteria will be recruited. The diagnosis will be reviewed by a neurologist specialized on movement disorders. Briefly, 50 patients with mild to moderate disease severity, will be enrolled according to the inclusion\exclusion criteria included in the dedicated section below.
The activities will be organized into 4 work packages (WP), each with measurable outputs verified by scheduled deliverables/milestones.
- WP1: Clinical Trial. The sample size has been defined based on published data of gait velocity in PD subjects, and a target sample of fifty PD individuals (divided in two separate cohorts) has been selected to achieve a power of at least 80% for detecting a mean group differences in mean gait velocity (p = 0.05). One cohort (n=25) will undergo a multidisciplinary intensive rehabilitation treatment, and the other will be treated with OWET. At baseline (T0) subjects will undergo neurophysiological evaluation (EEG-fMRI) and GA. Participants will then undergo an 8-weeks OWET. After the therapy (T1), the subjects will be evaluated, with the same protocol as at T0. After another 2 months, a follow-up (T2) will be conducted using the same protocol as T0.
- WP2: Motion analysis. State-of-the-art posture and GA will be performed pre- and post-rehabilitation.
- WP3: NMSM. Using the data collected in WP1 and WP2, NMSM will be performed to obtain muscular force and joint stiffness. This NMSM will be used to assess PD neuromuscular function pre- and post-rehabilitation.
- WP4: Neurophysiological assessment. A 256 channel High Density EEG (HD-EEG) recordings and analysis will be used to assess brain oscillation activity changes before and after the treatment. Multimodal brain imaging will be performed by simultaneous acquisition and analysis of neurophysiological signals (EEG/EMG) and fMRI data to assess the resting state connectivity and activation differences between pre- and post-treatment and to identify if the changes in the cortical activity is linked with the changes detected in WP3.
Anticipated Results Locomotor functions are positively recovered by a functional gait training. Indeed, in post-stroke subjects, patients who underwent this therapy have already shown to be more likely to achieve an independent walking than people who did not receive the same treatment.
OWET will improve quality of gait and balance. Effects with OWET will impact the quality of life. The results with OWET will provide innovative information for rehabilitative programs. The impact of the intervention will be assessed by measurable outcomes listed in the dedicated section below.
- Conditions
- Parkinson Disease
- Being tested
- Experimental: EksoGT, Functional kinematic training
- Keywords
- Parkinson Disease, rehabilitation exhoskeleton, gait analysis, fMRI, Electroencephalogram
- Medical subject headings
- Parkinson Disease
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Experimental: EksoGTDevice
EksoGT is an overground wearable gait trainer. The therapy will be carried out 3 days a week for 4 weeks.
Functional kinematic trainingOther
Device: No device. The functional kinematic training will be delivered as comparator treatment and will be carried out 3 days a week for 4 weeks.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| EksoGT | Experimental | Device: EksoGT. EksoGT is an overground wearable gait trainer. The therapy will be carried out 3 days a week for 4 weeks. Receives: Device: Experimental: EksoGT |
| Functional kinematic training | Active comparator | Device: No device. The functional kinematic training will be delivered as comparator treatment and will be carried out 3 days a week for 4 weeks. Receives: Other: Functional kinematic training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in joint kinematics after 30 days
Joint kinematics (degrees): trunk, pelvis, hip, knee, ankle (flexion-extension, ab-adduction, internal - external rotation)
Measured: Day 30
Change in joint kinematics after 60 days
Joint kinematics (degrees): trunk, pelvis, hip, knee, ankle (flexion-extension, ab-adduction, internal - external rotation)
Measured: Day 60
Change in Spatiotemporal parameters after 30 days - Gait velocity
Gait velocity (meters/seconds)
Measured: Day 30
Change in Spatiotemporal parameters after 60 days - Gait velocity
Gait velocity (meters/seconds)
Measured: Day 60
Change in Spatial parameters after 30 days
Step width (meters), step length (meters)
Measured: Day 30
Change in Spatial parameters after 60 days
Step width (meters), step length (meters)
Measured: Day 60
Change in Temporal parameters after 30 days
Step duration (seconds), gait period (seconds),stance period (seconds), swing period (seconds), double support (seconds)
Measured: Day 30
Change in Temporal parameters after 60 days
Step duration (seconds), gait period (seconds),stance period (seconds), swing period (seconds), double support (seconds)
Measured: Day 60
Change in Spatiotemporal parameters after 30 days - Cadence
Cadence (steps/minute)
Measured: Day 30
Change in Spatiotemporal parameters after 60 days - Cadence
Cadence (steps/minute)
Measured: Day 60
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure spatial parameters
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean distance from centre of COP trajectory (mm), root mean square of COP time series (mm), sway path, total COP trajectory length (mm), range of COP displacement (mm).
Measured: Day 30
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure spatial parameters
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean distance from centre of COP trajectory (mm), root mean square of COP time series (mm), sway path, total COP trajectory length (mm), range of COP displacement (mm)
Measured: Day 60
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure velocity
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean COP velocity (mm/s)
Measured: Day 30
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure velocity
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean COP velocity (mm/s)
Measured: Day 60
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure frequency
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean frequency (Hz), i.e., number, per second, of loops that have to be run by COP to cover total trajectory equal to sway path ; median frequency (Hz), frequency below which 50% of total power is present; 95% power frequency (Hz), frequency below which 95% of total power is present, centroidal frequency (Hz), frequency at which spectral mass is concentrated.
Measured: Day 30
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure frequency
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean frequency (Hz), i.e., number, per second, of loops that have to be run by COP to cover total trajectory equal to sway path ; median frequency (Hz), frequency below which 50% of total power is present; 95% power frequency (Hz), frequency below which 95% of total power is present, centroidal frequency (Hz), frequency at which spectral mass is concentrated.
Measured: Day 60
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure ellipse parameters
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: area of 95% confidence circumference (mm^2), area of 95% confidence ellipse (mm^2).
Measured: Day 30
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure ellipse parameters
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: area of 95% confidence circumference (mm^2), area of 95% confidence ellipse (mm^2).
Measured: Day 60
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure sway area
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: sway area, computed as area included in COP displacement per unit of time (mm^2/seconds).
Measured: Day 30
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure sway area
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: sway area, computed as area included in COP displacement per unit of time (mm^2/seconds).
Measured: Day 60
Change in muscle forces after 30 days
Musculotendon forces estimated via musculoskeletal modeling (OpenSim, CEINMS)
Measured: Day 30
Change in muscle forces after 60 days
Musculotendon forces estimated via musculoskeletal modeling (OpenSim, CEINMS)
Measured: Day 60
Secondary outcomes (20)
Change in Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) after 30 days
MDS-UPDRS in all its four components (0 no disability - 199 total disability)
Measured: Day 30
Change in Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) after 60 days
MDS-UPDRS in all its four components (0 no disability - 199 total disability)
Measured: Day 60
Change in Timed Up and Go test (TUG) after 30 days
Timed Up and Go test (TUG) (>= 12 seconds risk of falling).
Measured: Day 30
Change in Timed Up and Go test (TUG) after 60 days
Timed Up and Go test (TUG) (>= 12 seconds risk of falling).
Measured: Day 60
Change in Berg Balance Scale (BBS) after 30 days
Berg Balance Scale (BBS) (56 functional balance, < 45 greater risk of falling).
Measured: Day 30
Change in Berg Balance Scale (BBS) after 60 days
Berg Balance Scale (BBS) (56 functional balance, < 45 greater risk of falling).
Measured: Day 60
Change in Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) after 30 days
Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) (16 severe concern about falling - 64 no concern about falling).
Measured: Day 30
Change in Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) after 60 days
Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) (16 severe concern about falling - 64 no concern about falling).
Measured: Day 60
Change in 6 minutes walking test (6-WT) after 30 days
6 minutes walking test (6-WT) (min 311 meters - max 673 meters)
Measured: Day 30
Change in 6 minutes walking test (6-WT) after 60 days
6 minutes walking test (6-WT) (min 311 meters - max 673 meters)
Measured: Day 60
Change in Ziegler Protocol for the assessment of Freezing of Gait (FOG) severity after 30 days
Ziegler Protocol for the assessment of FOG severity (0 no festination, no FOG - 1 festination - 2 FOG).
Measured: Day 30
Change in Ziegler Protocol for the assessment of Freezing of Gait (FOG) severity after 60 days
Ziegler Protocol for the assessment of FOG severity (0 no festination, no FOG - 1 festination - 2 FOG).
Measured: Day 60
Change The New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (N-FOGQ) severity after 30 days
The New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (N-FOGQ) (0 never happened, 4 unable to walk for more than 30s).
Measured: Day 30
Change The New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (N-FOGQ) severity after 60 days
The New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (N-FOGQ) (0 never happened, 4 unable to walk for more than 30s).
Measured: Day 60
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 30 days : electromyography (EMG)
Magnitude (milliVolt)
Measured: Day 30
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 60 days : electromyography (EMG)
Magnitude (milliVolt)
Measured: Day 60
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 30 days : electroencephalogram (EEG)
Spectral parameters (Hz)
Measured: Day 30
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 60 days : electroencephalogram (EEG)
Spectral parameters (Hz)
Measured: Day 60
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 30 days : functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
Number of active voxel in the region of interest
Measured: Day 30
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 60 days : functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
Number of active voxel in the region of interest
Measured: Day 60
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Mar 2021
- Study start12 Jun 2020
- Primary completion12 Jun 2022
- Study completion31 Dec 2023 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (22)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Parkinson DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Padova
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Fresco Parkinson Center Villa Margherita, Vicenza, Italy, Fresco Institute for Parkinson's & Movement Disorders, NYU Langone
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, ZIMI SAWACHA., University of Padova
- Investigators
- Zimi Sawacha, PhD, Principal investigator, University of Padova
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04778852
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- EKSO_PD Protocol number 55-20
- Acronym
- Ekso_PD
- Status last verified
- May 2022
- First submitted
- 30 Nov 2020
- Last updated
- 10 May 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
Publications
Benedetti MG, Beghi E, De Tanti A, Cappozzo A, Basaglia N, Cutti AG, Cereatti A, Stagni R, Verdini F, Manca M, Fantozzi S, Mazza C, Camomilla V, Campanini I, Castagna A, Cavazzuti L, Del Maestro M, Croce UD, Gasperi M, Leo T, Marchi P, Petrarca M, Piccinini L, Rabuffetti M, Ravaschio A, Sawacha Z, Spolaor F, Tesio L, Vannozzi G, Visintin I, Ferrarin M. SIAMOC position paper on gait analysis in clinical practice: General requirements, methods and appropriateness. Results of an Italian consensus conference. Gait Posture. 2017 Oct;58:252-260. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.08.003. Epub 2017 Aug 5.
PubMed 28825997Sartori M, Fernandez JW, Modenese L, Carty CP, Barber LA, Oberhofer K, Zhang J, Handsfield GG, Stott NS, Besier TF, Farina D, Lloyd DG. Toward modeling locomotion using electromyography-informed 3D models: application to cerebral palsy. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med. 2017 Mar;9(2). doi: 10.1002/wsbm.1368. Epub 2016 Dec 21.
PubMed 28002649Bortole M, Venkatakrishnan A, Zhu F, Moreno JC, Francisco GE, Pons JL, Contreras-Vidal JL. The H2 robotic exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation after stroke: early findings from a clinical study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 Jun 17;12:54. doi: 10.1186/s12984-015-0048-y.
PubMed 26076696Volpe D, Signorini M, Marchetto A, Lynch T, Morris ME. A comparison of Irish set dancing and exercises for people with Parkinson's disease: a phase II feasibility study. BMC Geriatr. 2013 Jun 4;13:54. doi: 10.1186/1471-2318-13-54.
PubMed 23731986Sartori M, Lloyd DG, Farina D. Corrections to "Neural Data-Driven Musculoskeletal Modeling for Personalized Neurorehabilitation Technologies". IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016 Jun;63(6):1341. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2016.2563138.
PubMed 27214882Galli M, Cimolin V, De Pandis MF, Le Pera D, Sova I, Albertini G, Stocchi F, Franceschini M. Robot-assisted gait training versus treadmill training in patients with Parkinson's disease: a kinematic evaluation with gait profile score. Funct Neurol. 2016 Jul-Sep;31(3):163-70. doi: 10.11138/fneur/2016.31.3.163.
PubMed 27678210Sale P, De Pandis MF, Le Pera D, Sova I, Cimolin V, Ancillao A, Albertini G, Galli M, Stocchi F, Franceschini M. Robot-assisted walking training for individuals with Parkinson's disease: a pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Neurol. 2013 May 24;13:50. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-13-50.
PubMed 23706025Fundaro C, Giardini A, Maestri R, Traversoni S, Bartolo M, Casale R. Motor and psychosocial impact of robot-assisted gait training in a real-world rehabilitation setting: A pilot study. PLoS One. 2018 Feb 14;13(2):e0191894. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191894. eCollection 2018.
PubMed 29444172Picelli A, Melotti C, Origano F, Waldner A, Fiaschi A, Santilli V, Smania N. Robot-assisted gait training in patients with Parkinson disease: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012 May;26(4):353-61. doi: 10.1177/1545968311424417. Epub 2012 Jan 18.
PubMed 22258155Gassert R, Dietz V. Rehabilitation robots for the treatment of sensorimotor deficits: a neurophysiological perspective. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018 Jun 5;15(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12984-018-0383-x.
PubMed 29866106Del Din S, Bertoldo A, Sawacha Z, Jonsdottir J, Rabuffetti M, Cobelli C, Ferrarin M. Assessment of biofeedback rehabilitation in post-stroke patients combining fMRI and gait analysis: a case study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Apr 9;11:53. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-11-53.
PubMed 24716475Scarton A, Jonkers I, Guiotto A, Spolaor F, Guarneri G, Avogaro A, Cobelli C, Sawacha Z. Comparison of lower limb muscle strength between diabetic neuropathic and healthy subjects using OpenSim. Gait Posture. 2017 Oct;58:194-200. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.07.117. Epub 2017 Jul 31.
PubMed 28802220McGrath RL, Pires-Fernandes M, Knarr B, Higginson JS, Sergi F. Toward goal-oriented robotic gait training: The effect of gait speed and stride length on lower extremity joint torques. IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot. 2017 Jul;2017:270-275. doi: 10.1109/ICORR.2017.8009258.
PubMed 28813830Volpe D, Pavan D, Morris M, Guiotto A, Iansek R, Fortuna S, Frazzitta G, Sawacha Z. Underwater gait analysis in Parkinson's disease. Gait Posture. 2017 Feb;52:87-94. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.11.019. Epub 2016 Nov 10.
PubMed 27888696Frazzitta G, Balbi P, Maestri R, Bertotti G, Boveri N, Pezzoli G. The beneficial role of intensive exercise on Parkinson disease progression. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Jun;92(6):523-32. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31828cd254.
PubMed 23552330
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 May 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Quantitative Assessment of Training Effects Using a Wearable Exoskeleton in Parkinson Disease Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04778852
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Ekso_PD / EKSO_PD Protocol number 55-20
- Conditions
- Parkinson Disease
- Keywords
- Parkinson Disease, rehabilitation exhoskeleton, gait analysis, fMRI, Electroencephalogram
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 50 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of PadovaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Fresco Parkinson Center Villa Margherita, Vicenza, Italy, Fresco Institute for Parkinson's & Movement Disorders, NYU Langone
- Study start
- 12 Jun 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 12 Jun 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2023 (estimated)
- First posted
- 3 Mar 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The ability to walk independently is a primary goal when rehabilitating an individual with Parkinson Disease (PD). Indeed, PD patients display a flexed posture that coupled with an excessive joint stiffness lead to a poor walking mechanics that increase their risk of falls. Although studies have already shown the many benefits of robotic-assisted gait training in PD patients, research focusing on optimal rehabilitation methods has been directed towards powered lower-limb exoskeleton. Combining the advantages delivered from the grounded devices with the ability to train in a real-world environment, these systems provide a greater level of subject participation and increase subject's functional abilities while the wearable robotic system guarantees less support. The purpose of the present work is to evaluate the effects of an Over-ground Wearable Exoskeleton Training (OWET) on gait impairments in comparison with a multidisciplinary intensive rehabilitation treatment. As gait is a complex task that involves both central (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems (PNS), targeted rehabilitation must restore not only gait mechanics (ST parameters) but also physiological gait pattern (joint kinematics and dynamics). To this aim the impact of OWET on both CNS and PNS will be evaluated. Thus, a quantitative assessment of an individual's gait and neuromuscular function to robustly evaluate recovery of altered sensorimotor function at both the PNS and CNS is proposed. To this aim, comprehensive GA (spatiotemporal (ST) parameter, joint kinematics, joint stiffness) and electromyography (EMG) will be combined to determine PNS improvements, and fMRI with EEG will be used to assess CNS improvements.
Detailed description
Full Title: QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF TRAINING EFFECTS USING A WEARABLE EXOSKELETON IN PARKINSON DISEASE PATIENTS
RESEARCH PLAN
Specific Aims
The ability to walk independently is a primary goal when rehabilitating an individual with Parkinson Disease (PD). Indeed, PD patients display a flexed posture that coupled with an excessive joint stiffness lead to a poor walking mechanics that increase their risk of falls. Although studies have already shown the many benefits of robotic-assisted gait training in PD patients, research focusing on optimal rehabilitation methods has been directed towards powered lower-limb exoskeleton. Combining the advantages delivered from the grounded devices with the ability to train in a real-world environment, these systems provide a greater level of subject participation and increase subject's functional abilities while the wearable robotic system guarantees less support. The purpose of the proposed work is to evaluate the effects of an Over-ground Wearable Exoskeleton Training (OWET) on gait impairments in comparison with a multidisciplinary intensive rehabilitation treatment. As gait is a complex task that involves both central (CNS) and peripheral nervous systems (PNS), targeted rehabilitation must restore not only gait mechanics (ST parameters) but also physiological gait pattern (joint kinematics and dynamics). To this aim the impact of OWET on both CNS and PNS will be evaluated. Human movement analysis quantitatively assesses the neuromuscular and biomechanical features of movement. Recent literature has highlighted the benefit of coupling gait analysis (GA) and neuromusculoskeletal modeling (NMSM) for treatment planning and supplementing this approach with robotic rehabilitation. Another stalwart of PD research has been electroencephalography (EEG), which is widely used to evaluate executive dysfunction while functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) can detect cortical changes in motor activations during motor tasks. Thus, a quantitative assessment of an individual's gait and neuromuscular function to robustly evaluate recovery of altered sensorimotor function at both the PNS and CNS is proposed. To this aim, comprehensive GA (spatiotemporal (ST) parameter, joint kinematics, joint stiffness) and electromyography (EMG) will be combined to determine PNS improvements, and fMRI with EEG will be used to assess CNS improvements. As health care professionals and researchers need objective, reliable, and valid tools to plan subject-specific interventions, quantify therapeutic outcomes, and monitor change over time, the proposed study includes estimation of neutrally-informed muscle forces and joint stiffness, which is expected to provide sensitive determinants of PD movement control that could be crucial to inform treatment planning/assessment. Preliminary data are available and showed feasibility of the proposed measurement set up.
Background OWET: Although studies have already shown the many benefits of robotic-assisted gait training in PD patients (i.e. body weight supported treadmill training) as improving gait efficiency modifying spatiotemporal (ST) parameters, these strategies create an environment where the patient has less control over the gait initiation and lacks in variability of visuospatial flow. Therefore, research focusing on optimal rehabilitation methods has been directed towards powered lower-limb exoskeleton, as in post-stroke rehabilitation, where the effect of such a treatment dramatically enhanced potential for patient-specific rehabilitation, showing improvement in ST parameters. Combining the advantages delivered from the grounded robotic devices with the ability to train the patient in a real-world environment, these systems provide a greater level of subject participation for maintaining trunk and balance control, as well as navigating their path over different surfaces and increase subject's functional abilities while the wearable robotic system guarantees less support. Furthermore, the stability the exoskeleton addresses to the patient, allows a hands-free walking trial (with no clutches) which represents an integral part for a physiological locomotion restoration.
As gait involves both CNS and PNS, targeted rehabilitation must restore not only mechanics (speed, stride time and length) but also physiological gait pattern. This requires improvements at the level of both balance and lower limb joint motion. In this direction, wearable lower-limb powered exoskeletons promote functional training in a realistic walking-environment combined with a greater patient's engagement than in grounded devices. Human movement analysis quantitatively assesses the neuromuscular and biomechanical features of movement. Recent literature has highlighted the benefit of coupling GA and NMSM for treatment planning and supplementing this approach with robotic rehabilitation, however there is no study investigating gait effects from an OWET in those with PD, and no assessment that uses comprehensive GA and NMSM to reveal mechanistic changes as a result of therapy.
Neurophysiology of PD: A stalwart of PD research has been EEG, which is widely used to evaluate executive dysfunction while fMRI can detect cortical changes in motor activations during motor tasks. The protocol to use GA in combination with fMRI has already been adopted by the investigators in order to display the impacts of the rehabilitation process on the reorganization of the neural network, describing and quantifying the neural activity and the recovery after the treatment.
Motion analysis in PD: Gait in people with PD has been thoroughly studied with 3D GA systems in recent years, documenting a typical hypokinetic gait reduction of the stride-length with asymmetry between the strides, an increment of the cadence, the stance and double support phases, which compensates for the reduced stride length.
NMSM: Combining GA and NMSM enables one to track disease progression with enhanced precision. This has been demonstrated across a range of neuromuscular pathologies and healthy individuals. Critically, for each individual a neuromusculoskeletal model is created, driven by the individual's own EMG signals, and tracking their biomechanics, as has recently applied in neurologically impaired individuals. This creates a novel model that links in vivo neuromuscular functions to the individual, thus providing new biomarkers to assess and track PD motor impairment. Furthermore, since joint stiffness depends both on neural recruitment and mechanical properties, it is likely to provide a potent representation of neural and musculoskeletal PD impairment.
Significance and potential impact This project addresses the potential for OWET to restore normal gait in PD patients. OWET aims to improve overall body motion and lower joint stiffness in those with PD, thereby improving function, quality of life, and reducing risk of injurious falls. The proposed robotic device (Ekso GT™, EksoBionics, Richmond, CA, USA) relies functions by providing passive assistance to the ankle joint, which affects the rest of the body through mechanical coupling. Currently, the amount of device assistance is estimated based on a therapist experience and expertise. Modern motion analysis methods enable us to objectively assess the required assistance providing a means to tailor the assistance to each individual and remove the risks of clinical guesswork. Robotic devices assist the physical therapist by providing task-specific repeatable mechanical action to support therapies and enable higher intensity of training. OWET aims to reduce lower limb joint stiffness, which is a recognized biomarker of PD, thereby enhancing rehabilitation for PD patients.
Findings linked with the proposed study will likely give substantial solutions to the management of gait and postural disorders (posture, balance, and gait) in PD where valid interventions (pharmacological, neurosurgery, traditional physiotherapy) are lacking. Moreover, a NMSM that identifies patient-specific variables for therapy could be used to assess treatment outcomes but also to conduct on-line rehabilitation therapy by means remote control of the assistive device. This will provide a number of advantages over conventional approaches proposing an active treatment that is personalized and scalable to large populations and including a standardized training environment and an adaptable support that has the ability to increase the treatment intensity and dose, without being a burden on therapists. OWET is thus an ideal means to complete conventional therapy in clinic, while rehabilitation robots bear the potential for continued home therapy using simpler devices.
Study design The study will be carried out over 36 months. Patients with clinically established diagnosis of PD according to the U.K. Parkinson's Disease Society Brain Bank Diagnostic criteria will be recruited. The diagnosis will be reviewed by a neurologist specialized on movement disorders. Briefly, 50 patients with mild to moderate disease severity, will be enrolled according to the inclusion\exclusion criteria included in the dedicated section below.
The activities will be organized into 4 work packages (WP), each with measurable outputs verified by scheduled deliverables/milestones.
- WP1: Clinical Trial. The sample size has been defined based on published data of gait velocity in PD subjects, and a target sample of fifty PD individuals (divided in two separate cohorts) has been selected to achieve a power of at least 80% for detecting a mean group differences in mean gait velocity (p = 0.05). One cohort (n=25) will undergo a multidisciplinary intensive rehabilitation treatment, and the other will be treated with OWET. At baseline (T0) subjects will undergo neurophysiological evaluation (EEG-fMRI) and GA. Participants will then undergo an 8-weeks OWET. After the therapy (T1), the subjects will be evaluated, with the same protocol as at T0. After another 2 months, a follow-up (T2) will be conducted using the same protocol as T0.
- WP2: Motion analysis. State-of-the-art posture and GA will be performed pre- and post-rehabilitation.
- WP3: NMSM. Using the data collected in WP1 and WP2, NMSM will be performed to obtain muscular force and joint stiffness. This NMSM will be used to assess PD neuromuscular function pre- and post-rehabilitation.
- WP4: Neurophysiological assessment. A 256 channel High Density EEG (HD-EEG) recordings and analysis will be used to assess brain oscillation activity changes before and after the treatment. Multimodal brain imaging will be performed by simultaneous acquisition and analysis of neurophysiological signals (EEG/EMG) and fMRI data to assess the resting state connectivity and activation differences between pre- and post-treatment and to identify if the changes in the cortical activity is linked with the changes detected in WP3.
Anticipated Results Locomotor functions are positively recovered by a functional gait training. Indeed, in post-stroke subjects, patients who underwent this therapy have already shown to be more likely to achieve an independent walking than people who did not receive the same treatment.
OWET will improve quality of gait and balance. Effects with OWET will impact the quality of life. The results with OWET will provide innovative information for rehabilitative programs. The impact of the intervention will be assessed by measurable outcomes listed in the dedicated section below.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| EksoGT | Experimental | Device: Experimental: EksoGTDevice: EksoGT. EksoGT is an overground wearable gait trainer. The therapy will be carried out 3 days a week for 4 weeks. |
| Functional kinematic training | Active comparator | Other: Functional kinematic trainingDevice: No device. The functional kinematic training will be delivered as comparator treatment and will be carried out 3 days a week for 4 weeks. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 to 90 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Patient with rigid-acinetic bilateral PD form
- Hoehn-Yahr between 3-4
- At least 4 years of disease history
- Stable drug therapy response without any change performed in the 3 months before the study
- Presence of freezing (FOG) and of postural instability not responding to parkinsonian therapy
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Systemic illness
- Presence of cardiac pacemaker
- Postural abnormalities, orthopedic comorbidities that do not match the active physiotherapy treatment
- Presence of deep brain stimulation
- Presence of severe disautonomia with marked hypotension
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Experimental: EksoGTEksoGT is an overground wearable gait trainer. The therapy will be carried out 3 days a week for 4 weeks. | Device | EksoGT |
| Functional kinematic trainingDevice: No device. The functional kinematic training will be delivered as comparator treatment and will be carried out 3 days a week for 4 weeks. | Other | Functional kinematic training |
Primary outcome
Change in joint kinematics after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Joint kinematics (degrees): trunk, pelvis, hip, knee, ankle (flexion-extension, ab-adduction, internal - external rotation)
Change in joint kinematics after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Joint kinematics (degrees): trunk, pelvis, hip, knee, ankle (flexion-extension, ab-adduction, internal - external rotation)
Change in Spatiotemporal parameters after 30 days - Gait velocity
Time frame: Day 30
Gait velocity (meters/seconds)
Change in Spatiotemporal parameters after 60 days - Gait velocity
Time frame: Day 60
Gait velocity (meters/seconds)
Change in Spatial parameters after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Step width (meters), step length (meters)
Change in Spatial parameters after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Step width (meters), step length (meters)
Change in Temporal parameters after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Step duration (seconds), gait period (seconds),stance period (seconds), swing period (seconds), double support (seconds)
Change in Temporal parameters after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Step duration (seconds), gait period (seconds),stance period (seconds), swing period (seconds), double support (seconds)
Change in Spatiotemporal parameters after 30 days - Cadence
Time frame: Day 30
Cadence (steps/minute)
Change in Spatiotemporal parameters after 60 days - Cadence
Time frame: Day 60
Cadence (steps/minute)
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure spatial parameters
Time frame: Day 30
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean distance from centre of COP trajectory (mm), root mean square of COP time series (mm), sway path, total COP trajectory length (mm), range of COP displacement (mm).
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure spatial parameters
Time frame: Day 60
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean distance from centre of COP trajectory (mm), root mean square of COP time series (mm), sway path, total COP trajectory length (mm), range of COP displacement (mm)
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure velocity
Time frame: Day 30
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean COP velocity (mm/s)
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure velocity
Time frame: Day 60
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean COP velocity (mm/s)
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure frequency
Time frame: Day 30
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean frequency (Hz), i.e., number, per second, of loops that have to be run by COP to cover total trajectory equal to sway path ; median frequency (Hz), frequency below which 50% of total power is present; 95% power frequency (Hz), frequency below which 95% of total power is present, centroidal frequency (Hz), frequency at which spectral mass is concentrated.
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure frequency
Time frame: Day 60
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: mean frequency (Hz), i.e., number, per second, of loops that have to be run by COP to cover total trajectory equal to sway path ; median frequency (Hz), frequency below which 50% of total power is present; 95% power frequency (Hz), frequency below which 95% of total power is present, centroidal frequency (Hz), frequency at which spectral mass is concentrated.
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure ellipse parameters
Time frame: Day 30
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: area of 95% confidence circumference (mm^2), area of 95% confidence ellipse (mm^2).
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure ellipse parameters
Time frame: Day 60
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: area of 95% confidence circumference (mm^2), area of 95% confidence ellipse (mm^2).
Change in balance after 30 days - center of pressure sway area
Time frame: Day 30
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: sway area, computed as area included in COP displacement per unit of time (mm^2/seconds).
Change in balance after 60 days - center of pressure sway area
Time frame: Day 60
Balance during Romberg Test. From the center of pressure (COP) the following parameters will be extracted: sway area, computed as area included in COP displacement per unit of time (mm^2/seconds).
Change in muscle forces after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Musculotendon forces estimated via musculoskeletal modeling (OpenSim, CEINMS)
Change in muscle forces after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Musculotendon forces estimated via musculoskeletal modeling (OpenSim, CEINMS)
20 secondary outcomes
Change in Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Change in Movement Disorder Society - Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Change in Timed Up and Go test (TUG) after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Change in Timed Up and Go test (TUG) after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Change in Berg Balance Scale (BBS) after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Change in Berg Balance Scale (BBS) after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Change in Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Change in Falls Efficacy Scale (FES) after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Change in 6 minutes walking test (6-WT) after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Change in 6 minutes walking test (6-WT) after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Change in Ziegler Protocol for the assessment of Freezing of Gait (FOG) severity after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Change in Ziegler Protocol for the assessment of Freezing of Gait (FOG) severity after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Change The New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (N-FOGQ) severity after 30 days
Time frame: Day 30
Change The New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (N-FOGQ) severity after 60 days
Time frame: Day 60
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 30 days : electromyography (EMG)
Time frame: Day 30
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 60 days : electromyography (EMG)
Time frame: Day 60
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 30 days : electroencephalogram (EEG)
Time frame: Day 30
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 60 days : electroencephalogram (EEG)
Time frame: Day 60
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 30 days : functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
Time frame: Day 30
Change in neurophysiological assessment after 60 days : functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)
Time frame: Day 60
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 May 2023.
- Background: PubMed 28825997Benedetti MG, Beghi E, De Tanti A, Cappozzo A, Basaglia N, Cutti AG, Cereatti A, Stagni R, Verdini F, Manca M, Fantozzi S, Mazza C, Camomilla V, Campanini I, Castagna A, Cavazzuti L, Del Maestro M, Croce UD, Gasperi M, Leo T, Marchi P, Petrarca M, Piccinini L, Rabuffetti M, Ravaschio A, Sawacha Z, Spolaor F, Tesio L, Vannozzi G, Visintin I, Ferrarin M. SIAMOC position paper on gait analysis in clinical practice: General requirements, methods and appropriateness. Results of an Italian consensus conference. Gait Posture. 2017 Oct;58:252-260. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.08.003. Epub 2017 Aug 5.
- Background: PubMed 28002649Sartori M, Fernandez JW, Modenese L, Carty CP, Barber LA, Oberhofer K, Zhang J, Handsfield GG, Stott NS, Besier TF, Farina D, Lloyd DG. Toward modeling locomotion using electromyography-informed 3D models: application to cerebral palsy. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med. 2017 Mar;9(2). doi: 10.1002/wsbm.1368. Epub 2016 Dec 21.
- Background: PubMed 26076696Bortole M, Venkatakrishnan A, Zhu F, Moreno JC, Francisco GE, Pons JL, Contreras-Vidal JL. The H2 robotic exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation after stroke: early findings from a clinical study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 Jun 17;12:54. doi: 10.1186/s12984-015-0048-y.
- Background: PubMed 23731986Volpe D, Signorini M, Marchetto A, Lynch T, Morris ME. A comparison of Irish set dancing and exercises for people with Parkinson's disease: a phase II feasibility study. BMC Geriatr. 2013 Jun 4;13:54. doi: 10.1186/1471-2318-13-54.
- Background: PubMed 27214882Sartori M, Lloyd DG, Farina D. Corrections to "Neural Data-Driven Musculoskeletal Modeling for Personalized Neurorehabilitation Technologies". IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2016 Jun;63(6):1341. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2016.2563138.
- Background: PubMed 27678210Galli M, Cimolin V, De Pandis MF, Le Pera D, Sova I, Albertini G, Stocchi F, Franceschini M. Robot-assisted gait training versus treadmill training in patients with Parkinson's disease: a kinematic evaluation with gait profile score. Funct Neurol. 2016 Jul-Sep;31(3):163-70. doi: 10.11138/fneur/2016.31.3.163.
- Background: PubMed 23706025Sale P, De Pandis MF, Le Pera D, Sova I, Cimolin V, Ancillao A, Albertini G, Galli M, Stocchi F, Franceschini M. Robot-assisted walking training for individuals with Parkinson's disease: a pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Neurol. 2013 May 24;13:50. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-13-50.
- Background: PubMed 29444172Fundaro C, Giardini A, Maestri R, Traversoni S, Bartolo M, Casale R. Motor and psychosocial impact of robot-assisted gait training in a real-world rehabilitation setting: A pilot study. PLoS One. 2018 Feb 14;13(2):e0191894. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191894. eCollection 2018.
- Background: PubMed 22258155Picelli A, Melotti C, Origano F, Waldner A, Fiaschi A, Santilli V, Smania N. Robot-assisted gait training in patients with Parkinson disease: a randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2012 May;26(4):353-61. doi: 10.1177/1545968311424417. Epub 2012 Jan 18.
- Background: PubMed 29866106Gassert R, Dietz V. Rehabilitation robots for the treatment of sensorimotor deficits: a neurophysiological perspective. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018 Jun 5;15(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s12984-018-0383-x.
- Background: PubMed 24716475Del Din S, Bertoldo A, Sawacha Z, Jonsdottir J, Rabuffetti M, Cobelli C, Ferrarin M. Assessment of biofeedback rehabilitation in post-stroke patients combining fMRI and gait analysis: a case study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Apr 9;11:53. doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-11-53.
- Background: PubMed 28802220Scarton A, Jonkers I, Guiotto A, Spolaor F, Guarneri G, Avogaro A, Cobelli C, Sawacha Z. Comparison of lower limb muscle strength between diabetic neuropathic and healthy subjects using OpenSim. Gait Posture. 2017 Oct;58:194-200. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.07.117. Epub 2017 Jul 31.
- Dennis R. Louie, Powered robotic exoskeletons in post-stroke rehabilitation of gait: a scoping reviewLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Parkinson Disease
Recruiting
Automated Language Analysis in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Application of Artificial Intelligence Models
Alzheimer's Disease (AD), Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD)
Recruiting
Investigating Basal Ganglia-Cortical Physiology During Sleep and Its Modulation by Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson Disease
Parkinson's Disease (PD)
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
A Study to Evaluate Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Hydroxychloroquine in Subjects With Parkinson's Disease
Parkinson&Amp;#39;s Disease
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
STAR0602 With Nivolumab in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer and in Metastatic Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer, and STAR0602 Alone in Thymic Carcinoma
NSCLC, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Not yet recruiting
Cognitive-Motor Training for Gait Adaptability in Parkinson Disease
Parkinson Disease
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Zimi Sawacha, PhD principal investigator
University of Padova
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Experimental: EksoGT and Functional kinematic training in people with Parkinson Disease, run by University of Padova at 2 sites in Italy.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 11 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 May 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in Italy. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Zimi Sawacha, PhD (+39 0498277633, zimi.sawacha@dei.unipd.it), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in joint kinematics after 30 days (time frame: Day 30). The study lists 22 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04778852, which also lists 22 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 May 2023.