StrokeNCT06273475
Robot-Assisted Training Versus Standard Training in Ischemic Stroke
A study testing Robot-assisted Training and Standard Training in people with Stroke and Ischemic Stroke, run by Odense University Hospital at 2 sites in Denmark.
Trial summary
The aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) nested in a prospective cohort, is to investigate the superior effect of late-phase robot-assisted versus standard training on motor function, physical function, fatigue, and quality of life in a moderately-to-severely impaired chronic stroke population following… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke, Ischemic Stroke
- What is being tested?
- Robot-assisted Training and Standard Training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesDenmark
- Study dates
- 1 May 2024to 1 Feb 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Ischemic and haemorrhagic stroke
- Chronic state (6-24 months post-stroke).
- Subacute rehabilitation terminated (subacute phase defined as until 6 months post-stroke).
- Moderately-severely impaired:
- Modified Rankin Scale Score 3-5.
- Scandinavian Stroke Scale Leg Motor Function Score 0-4 and/or SSS gait function 0-9.
- Approved by referring doctor
Who cannot join
- Prior SAH
- Infarct located in the cerebellum or brain stem
- Severe fatigue making study completion improbable.
- Cognitive deficits impeding study participation.
- Inability to walk independently pre-stroke.
- Recurrence of cardiovascular/cerebrovascular accidents.
Show all 9Show fewer
- Pre-existing neurological diseases or ongoing cancer treatment.
- Refusing group allocation.
- Concurrent participation in another clinical trial potentially interacting with the present trial.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Anders Holsgaard-Larsen, Professor contact
Denmark2 sites, 2 recruiting
- Not yet recruiting
Rigshospitalet and Herlev Gentofte Hospital
Copenhagen
Jon Skovgaard Jensen, Ph.d.-student, jskovgaard@health.sdu.dk
Christina Rostrup Kruuse, Professor, MD, PhD, DMSc
- Recruiting
Odense University Hospital
Odense
Jon Skovgaard Jensen, Ph.d.-student, jskovgaard@health.sdu.dk
Anders Holsgaard-Larsen, Professor
About this study
Official title: The Effect of Robot-Assisted Versus Standard Training on Motor Function Following Subacute Rehabilitation After Ischemic Stroke - a Randomised Controlled Trial Nested in a Prospective Cohort.
The aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) nested in a prospective cohort, is to investigate the superior effect of late-phase robot-assisted versus standard training on motor function, physical function, fatigue, and quality of life in a moderately-to-severely impaired chronic stroke population following subacute rehabilitation.
The main hypothesis of the study is:
Robot-assisted training has a superior effect on motor function (Fugl-Meyer Lower Extremity Assessment; primary outcome), physical function, fatigue, and quality of life in moderately-to-severely impaired chronic stroke-affected individuals in comparison to standard training.
Read the detailed description
Background:
Stroke is the collective term for acute focal injuries to the central nervous system (CNS) caused by a disturbance in the blood circulation of the brain i.e., cerebral infarction (ischemic stroke) or intracerebral hemorrhage (hemorrhagic stroke). On an annual basis, 113,000 UK citizens and 12,000 Danish citizens are hospitalised following a stroke, and worldwide stroke is one of the leading causes of disability. Stroke-affected individuals may display residual impairments in motor, physical and cognitive functions along with mental fatigue and depression. Body weight unloading (BWU) has been suggested as a method of training for people with neurological disorders suffering from severe limitations in walking ability. BWU is the application of a vertical upwards force on the body centre of mass, thereby alleviating individuals of supporting their own body weight against gravity. However, the efficacy of BWU-based training is unclear. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to investigate the superior effect of late-phase robot-assisted versus standard training on motor function, physical function, fatigue, and quality of life in a moderately-to-severely impaired chronic stroke population following subacute rehabilitation.
Trial design overview:
Randomised, assessor-blinded, two-arm, multicentre trial. Participants will be recruited through Odense University Hospital, Herlev Gentofte Hospital and Rigshospitalet. Stroke-affected patients are recruited to the prospective cohort 3 months post-stroke. Stroke-affected individuals will be recruited to the RCT from the prospective cohort 6 months post-stroke and randomised 1:1 for robot-assisted training (intervention group) or standard training (active control group). Cohort participants not eligible and/or interested in participation in the RCT study will continue their participation in the prospective cohort.
The RCT study compares training with the robot-assisted body weight unloading to standard training without the robot. Training programs will be matched for total hours allocated to training and will consist of 2 sessions per week with a physiotherapist (one-on-one) and last 6 months (48 training sessions in total). Each session will last 60 minutes, 75 minutes and 90 minutes during the first, middle and last two months of the training program, respectively. Thus, INT and CON are matched for training time, but the effective training volume (resistance times repetitions) is not controlled.
Blinding:
The primary investigator will be blinded to allocation and will not participate in the randomisation, training or testing of participants. Statistical analysis will be performed on allocation codes. The test leader responsible for RCT-study testing will be blinded. It will not be possible to blind study participants and the physiotherapists conducting the training.
Randomisation Randomisation is performed internet-based using REDCap Randomise allocated 1:1. The randomisation takes place following pre-intervention testing at 6-months post-stroke. The study uses block randomisation in blocks of 2 and 4. Stratification is applied using the Modified Rankin Scale (3,4,5). The primary investigator is blinded with respect to the permuted blocking strategy. A data manager with no clinical involvement in the trial, prepares the randomisation sequence, and the allocation is concealed in a password-protected computer file.
Compliance
No study restrictions are imposed on potential regular 'outside-the-study' visits to physiotherapist or visits from occupational therapists. Acceptable adherence is defined as a completion of minimum 70% of scheduled sessions. Moreover, number/percent of completed training sessions and achievement of target intensity/volume will be registered in a training log by the physiotherapist.
Time points
Time points are reported as time since onset of stroke. The following time-points are therefore included in the present study: 3-, 6-, 12-, and 18-months post-stroke (corresponding to T3, T6, T12 and T18). Onset of stroke is indicated as T0.
Questionnaires are sent to the prospective cohort participants at T3, T6, T12, T18. RCT-outcomes will be assessed at pre-intervention (T6) and post-intervention (T12). Blood samples will be included at T3, T6, T12.
Sample Size
A priori sample size calculation was performed and resulted in a required sample size of 34 study participants. This was based on detecting a minimally clinically important between-group difference (MCID) of 6 points on the FM-LE scale and a standard deviation of 6 points at an α level of 5% and with a statistical power of 80%. Allowing for dropout the aim is to include 40 participants in total.
Statistical analysis
An assessor-blinded intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis will be performed on primary and secondary outcome measures (Primary Analysis). A full analysis data set will be created with two imputation techniques and sensitivity analysis will be performed to examine robustness of any statistically significant differences. The ITT analysis will employ a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyse between-group differences in change-scores from pre- to post-intervention. A per protocol analysis (between-group differences in change-scores using ANOVA) will be included as a secondary analysis on participants demonstrating acceptable adherence (>70%).
Ethics:
The study was submitted to The Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics for Southern Denmark. The project approved the project on the 17th of January 2024.
- Conditions
- Stroke, Ischemic Stroke
- Being tested
- Robot-assisted Training, Standard Training
- Keywords
- Stroke, Body weight unloading, Motor function, Rehabilitation
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke, Ischemic Stroke
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Robot-assisted TrainingOther
Gait training and functional strength training facilitated by body weight unloading robotic technology yielding a dynamic unloading force applied to the body centre of mass. Gait training will be conducted both on treadmill and overground. Functional strength training exercises include sit-to-stand, stair-walking, step-ups etc. The goal is to gradually reduce body weight unloading as participants progress through the intervention period.
Standard TrainingOther
Gait training and functional strength training facilitated without the use of body weight unloading robotic technology, thereby only allowing manual assistance from physiotherapists. The goal of training is the same as in the intervention group, however no body weight unloading device will be implemented in the active control group.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Experimental | Training facilitated through body weight unloading robotic technology yielding a dynamic unloading force applied to the body centre of mass. Receives: Other: Robot-assisted Training |
| Active Control | Active comparator | Training facilitated without the use of body weight unloading robotic technology, thereby only allowing manual assistance from physiotherapists. Receives: Other: Standard Training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Fugl-Meyer Lower Extremity Assessment of Motor Function
The primary outcome measure is the between-group difference in change score of Fugl-Meyer Lower Extremity Assessment (FM-LE) from pre- (T6) to post-intervention (T12). The FM-LE assesses motor function and has been recommended as a part of a core outcome set in stroke rehabilitation studies.
Measured: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Secondary outcomes (10)
Modified Rankin Scale Score (between-group change)
Global disability will be assessed using the Modified Rankin Scale, which classifies participants from 0-6 as 0) no symptoms, 1) no significant disability, 2) slight disability, 3) moderate disability, 4) moderate severe disability, 5) severe disability and 6) deceased.
Measured: Prospective cohorte: 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post stroke. RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke).
Functional Ambulation Category (between-group change)
The Functional Ambulation Category is a clinical gait assessment scale used to distinguish 6 levels of walking ability based on required physical support. The categories are as follows: 0) Nonfunctional ambulation, 1) Ambulator - Dependent for Physical Assistance Level 2, 2) Ambulator - Dependent for Physical Assistance Level 1, 3) Ambulator - Dependent for Supervision, 4) Ambulator - Independent, Level surfaces only, 5) Ambulator - Independent.
Measured: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Berg Balance Scale (between-group change)
The Berg Balance Scale consists of 14 items testing the participant's ability to maintain positions of varying difficulty and to perform tasks such as transfer between positions, reach forward and alter stance positions. Each item is scored on a five-point ordinal scale ranging from 0 (cannot perform the task) to 4 (independence). Total scores can range from 0 to 56.
Measured: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Barthel-100 Index (between-group change)
The Barthel-100 Index is a clinical assessment of independence in activities of daily living (ADLs) through observation. The assessment has 10 items (feeding, bathing, grooming, dressing, bowels, bladder, toilet use, transfers, mobility, stairs) and participants may score 0-100 points. This measurement has been recommended as a part of a core outcome set.
Measured: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Global Rating of Change (between-group change)
Global Rating of Change is used to assess the participants' overall experience of change from pre- to post-intervention (T6-T12) and from post-intervention to follow-up (T12-T18). A seven-point likert scale is used. Participants will be asked to compare their current overall health to their health 6 months ago with answers ranging from "Much worse", "Little worse", "The same", "Little better", and "Much better.
Measured: RCT: Post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke)
International Physical Activity Questionnaire - Short Form (between-group change)
The International Physical Activity Questionnaire - Short Form is a patient-reported outcome measurement used to measure physical activity over the past week in four different intensity levels, including 1) vigorous activities, 2) moderate activities, 3) walking, and 4) sitting. Higher values equal higher levels of physical activity.
Measured: Prospective cohorte: 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post stroke. RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke).
Fatigue Severity Scale 7 (between-group change)
The Fatigue Severity Scale 7 (FSS-7) is a one-dimensional 7-item patient reported outcome measurement commonly implemented in stroke trials. Each item is scored from one to seven with higher scores indicating increased fatigue. The FSS-7 was shown to be more valid than the 9-item version of the instrument (FSS-9), and therefore this version of the instrument is implemented.
Measured: Prospective cohorte: 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post stroke. RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke).
EQ-5D-5L Quality of Life (between-group change)
The EQ-5D-5L (European Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions) is a validated survey for measuring health-related quality of life. It consists of five dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. The outcome is reported on a scale of 1-5 where 1 is no problems and 5 is extreme problems. This measurement has been recommended as a part of a core outcome set.
Measured: Prospective cohorte: 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post stroke. RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke).
Hand-grip strength (between-group change)
Hand-grip strength is a performance-based measurement assessed using a hand-held dynamometer. The outcome is in kilograms and used in the present study as an indicator for upper limb function.
Measured: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Gait speed (between-group change)
The 10-meter walking test is a performance-based measurement to evaluate gait speed. This test is recommended in two forms as a part of a core outcome set; 1) Can the person independently walk 10 metres (gait aids permitted) yes/no? and 2) gait speed on the 10-meter test if the person is able to independently walk 10 metres.
Measured: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Feb 2024
- Study start1 May 2024
- Primary completion1 Mar 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Feb 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for StrokeStudies 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
- Model description
- Multicentre randomised (1:1) parallel-group intervention study with assessor-blinding.
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Odense University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Stanford University, Sygehus Lillebaelt, Danish Association of the Physically Disabled
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Jon Skovgaard Jensen, Ph.d.-student, Principal investigator, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern DenmarkAnders Holsgaard-Larsen, Professor, Study director, Odense University Hospital and Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06273475
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- OUH RoboRehab
- Status last verified
- May 2025
- First submitted
- 1 Feb 2024
- Last updated
- 20 Nov 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Skovgaard Jensen J, Sorensen AS, Kruuse C, Nielsen HH, Skov CD, Jensen HB, Buckwalter MS, Bojsen-Moller J, Lambertsen KL, Holsgaard-Larsen A. The effect of robot-assisted versus standard training on motor function following subacute rehabilitation after ischemic stroke - protocol for a randomised controlled trial nested in a prospective cohort (RoboRehab). BMC Neurol. 2024 Jul 4;24(1):233. doi: 10.1186/s12883-024-03734-9.
PubMed 38965499
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Nov 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Effect of Robot-Assisted Versus Standard Training on Motor Function Following Subacute Rehabilitation After Ischemic Stroke - a Randomised Controlled Trial Nested in a Prospective Cohort.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06273475
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- OUH RoboRehab
- Conditions
- Stroke, Ischemic Stroke
- Keywords
- Stroke, Body weight unloading, Motor function, Rehabilitation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Odense University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Stanford University, Sygehus Lillebaelt, Danish Association of the Physically Disabled
- Study start
- 1 May 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Mar 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Feb 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 22 Feb 2024 (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 aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) nested in a prospective cohort, is to investigate the superior effect of late-phase robot-assisted versus standard training on motor function, physical function, fatigue, and quality of life in a moderately-to-severely impaired chronic stroke population following subacute rehabilitation.
The main hypothesis of the study is:
Robot-assisted training has a superior effect on motor function (Fugl-Meyer Lower Extremity Assessment; primary outcome), physical function, fatigue, and quality of life in moderately-to-severely impaired chronic stroke-affected individuals in comparison to standard training.
Detailed description
Background:
Stroke is the collective term for acute focal injuries to the central nervous system (CNS) caused by a disturbance in the blood circulation of the brain i.e., cerebral infarction (ischemic stroke) or intracerebral hemorrhage (hemorrhagic stroke). On an annual basis, 113,000 UK citizens and 12,000 Danish citizens are hospitalised following a stroke, and worldwide stroke is one of the leading causes of disability. Stroke-affected individuals may display residual impairments in motor, physical and cognitive functions along with mental fatigue and depression. Body weight unloading (BWU) has been suggested as a method of training for people with neurological disorders suffering from severe limitations in walking ability. BWU is the application of a vertical upwards force on the body centre of mass, thereby alleviating individuals of supporting their own body weight against gravity. However, the efficacy of BWU-based training is unclear. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to investigate the superior effect of late-phase robot-assisted versus standard training on motor function, physical function, fatigue, and quality of life in a moderately-to-severely impaired chronic stroke population following subacute rehabilitation.
Trial design overview:
Randomised, assessor-blinded, two-arm, multicentre trial. Participants will be recruited through Odense University Hospital, Herlev Gentofte Hospital and Rigshospitalet. Stroke-affected patients are recruited to the prospective cohort 3 months post-stroke. Stroke-affected individuals will be recruited to the RCT from the prospective cohort 6 months post-stroke and randomised 1:1 for robot-assisted training (intervention group) or standard training (active control group). Cohort participants not eligible and/or interested in participation in the RCT study will continue their participation in the prospective cohort.
The RCT study compares training with the robot-assisted body weight unloading to standard training without the robot. Training programs will be matched for total hours allocated to training and will consist of 2 sessions per week with a physiotherapist (one-on-one) and last 6 months (48 training sessions in total). Each session will last 60 minutes, 75 minutes and 90 minutes during the first, middle and last two months of the training program, respectively. Thus, INT and CON are matched for training time, but the effective training volume (resistance times repetitions) is not controlled.
Blinding:
The primary investigator will be blinded to allocation and will not participate in the randomisation, training or testing of participants. Statistical analysis will be performed on allocation codes. The test leader responsible for RCT-study testing will be blinded. It will not be possible to blind study participants and the physiotherapists conducting the training.
Randomisation Randomisation is performed internet-based using REDCap Randomise allocated 1:1. The randomisation takes place following pre-intervention testing at 6-months post-stroke. The study uses block randomisation in blocks of 2 and 4. Stratification is applied using the Modified Rankin Scale (3,4,5). The primary investigator is blinded with respect to the permuted blocking strategy. A data manager with no clinical involvement in the trial, prepares the randomisation sequence, and the allocation is concealed in a password-protected computer file.
Compliance
No study restrictions are imposed on potential regular 'outside-the-study' visits to physiotherapist or visits from occupational therapists. Acceptable adherence is defined as a completion of minimum 70% of scheduled sessions. Moreover, number/percent of completed training sessions and achievement of target intensity/volume will be registered in a training log by the physiotherapist.
Time points
Time points are reported as time since onset of stroke. The following time-points are therefore included in the present study: 3-, 6-, 12-, and 18-months post-stroke (corresponding to T3, T6, T12 and T18). Onset of stroke is indicated as T0.
Questionnaires are sent to the prospective cohort participants at T3, T6, T12, T18. RCT-outcomes will be assessed at pre-intervention (T6) and post-intervention (T12). Blood samples will be included at T3, T6, T12.
Sample Size
A priori sample size calculation was performed and resulted in a required sample size of 34 study participants. This was based on detecting a minimally clinically important between-group difference (MCID) of 6 points on the FM-LE scale and a standard deviation of 6 points at an α level of 5% and with a statistical power of 80%. Allowing for dropout the aim is to include 40 participants in total.
Statistical analysis
An assessor-blinded intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis will be performed on primary and secondary outcome measures (Primary Analysis). A full analysis data set will be created with two imputation techniques and sensitivity analysis will be performed to examine robustness of any statistically significant differences. The ITT analysis will employ a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to analyse between-group differences in change-scores from pre- to post-intervention. A per protocol analysis (between-group differences in change-scores using ANOVA) will be included as a secondary analysis on participants demonstrating acceptable adherence (>70%).
Ethics:
The study was submitted to The Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics for Southern Denmark. The project approved the project on the 17th of January 2024.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Multicentre randomised (1:1) parallel-group intervention study with assessor-blinding.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention | Experimental | Other: Robot-assisted TrainingTraining facilitated through body weight unloading robotic technology yielding a dynamic unloading force applied to the body centre of mass. |
| Active Control | Active comparator | Other: Standard TrainingTraining facilitated without the use of body weight unloading robotic technology, thereby only allowing manual assistance from physiotherapists. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Ischemic and haemorrhagic stroke
- Chronic state (6-24 months post-stroke).
- Subacute rehabilitation terminated (subacute phase defined as until 6 months post-stroke).
- Moderately-severely impaired:
- Approved by referring doctor
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Prior SAH
- Infarct located in the cerebellum or brain stem
- Severe fatigue making study completion improbable.
- Cognitive deficits impeding study participation.
- Inability to walk independently pre-stroke.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Robot-assisted TrainingGait training and functional strength training facilitated by body weight unloading robotic technology yielding a dynamic unloading force applied to the body centre of mass. Gait training will be conducted both on treadmill and overground. Functional strength training exercises include sit-to-stand, stair-walking, step-ups etc. The goal is to gradually reduce body weight unloading as participants progress through the intervention period. | Other | Intervention |
| Standard TrainingGait training and functional strength training facilitated without the use of body weight unloading robotic technology, thereby only allowing manual assistance from physiotherapists. The goal of training is the same as in the intervention group, however no body weight unloading device will be implemented in the active control group. | Other | Active Control |
Primary outcome
Fugl-Meyer Lower Extremity Assessment of Motor Function
Time frame: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
The primary outcome measure is the between-group difference in change score of Fugl-Meyer Lower Extremity Assessment (FM-LE) from pre- (T6) to post-intervention (T12). The FM-LE assesses motor function and has been recommended as a part of a core outcome set in stroke rehabilitation studies.
10 secondary outcomes
Modified Rankin Scale Score (between-group change)
Time frame: Prospective cohorte: 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post stroke. RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke).
Functional Ambulation Category (between-group change)
Time frame: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Berg Balance Scale (between-group change)
Time frame: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Barthel-100 Index (between-group change)
Time frame: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Global Rating of Change (between-group change)
Time frame: RCT: Post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke)
International Physical Activity Questionnaire - Short Form (between-group change)
Time frame: Prospective cohorte: 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post stroke. RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke).
Fatigue Severity Scale 7 (between-group change)
Time frame: Prospective cohorte: 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post stroke. RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke).
EQ-5D-5L Quality of Life (between-group change)
Time frame: Prospective cohorte: 3, 6, 12, and 18 months post stroke. RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke) and follow-up (18-30 months post-stroke).
Hand-grip strength (between-group change)
Time frame: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Gait speed (between-group change)
Time frame: RCT: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Nov 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38965499Skovgaard Jensen J, Sorensen AS, Kruuse C, Nielsen HH, Skov CD, Jensen HB, Buckwalter MS, Bojsen-Moller J, Lambertsen KL, Holsgaard-Larsen A. The effect of robot-assisted versus standard training on motor function following subacute rehabilitation after ischemic stroke - protocol for a randomised controlled trial nested in a prospective cohort (RoboRehab). BMC Neurol. 2024 Jul 4;24(1):233. doi: 10.1186/s12883-024-03734-9.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Stroke
Recruiting
Delay AvoIding Primary Evaluation for ThRombectomy of Acute StrokE Patients With Large Vessel OCclusion in the Angiography SuiTe
Stroke, Acute
RecruitingPhase 4
Xeomin® and Gait Related Mobility After Stroke
Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
Implementing Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in a Rehabilitation Setting
Aphasia, Stroke
Not yet recruiting
EEG Feedback-Based Vagus Nerve Stimulation for Post-Stroke Dysphagia
Ischemic Stroke, Post-stroke Dysphagia
RecruitingObservational study
Development and Validation of Risk Prediction Models for Stroke and Cognitive Impairment in Moyamoya Disease and Moyamoya Syndrome
Moyamoya Disease, Moyamoya Syndrome
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.
Anders Holsgaard-Larsen, Professor contact
Jon Skovgaard Jensen, Ph.d.-student principal investigator
Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark
Anders Holsgaard-Larsen, Professor study director
Odense University Hospital and Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Robot-assisted Training and Standard Training in people with Stroke and Ischemic Stroke, run by Odense University Hospital at 2 sites in Denmark.
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 7 inclusion and 9 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Nov 2025. 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 Denmark. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Jon Skovgaard Jensen, Ph.d.-student (+4530127595, jskovgaard@health.sdu.dk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Fugl-Meyer Lower Extremity Assessment of Motor Function (time frame: Pre-intervention (6-18 months post-stroke) and post-intervention (12-24 months post-stroke).). 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 NCT06273475, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 20 Nov 2025.