Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Body weight support systems are commonly used for gait training. A new breed of devices for gait training are soft exosuits. To optimize rehabilitation outcomes, it is important to gain deeper insight in the effect of these support systems on gait. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of a body weight support system and soft exosuit on dynamic balance and knee and hip kinematics during gait in people with incomplete spinal cord injury.
Rationale: People with incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) often experience gait impairments. Body weight support (BWS) systems are commonly used for gait training. Overground BWS systems could have 2 or 3 degrees of freedom (DoF). A decrease in DoF will reduce the demand's on people's balance capacity during walking. A new breed of devices for gait training are soft exosuits. They could deliver support around the knee and the hip joint, which are the main contributors for bodyweight support. Although a BWS system and a soft exosuit provide both support against gravity these systems differ in the approach of delivering this support. To optimize rehabilitation outcomes, it is important to gain deeper insight in the effect of these support systems on gait. In this study a 2-DoF BWS system, the ZeroG, and a soft exosuit, the Myosuit, will be studied.
Objective: Investigate the effect of a BWS system and soft exosuit on dynamic balance and knee and hip kinematics during gait in people with incomplete spinal cord injury.
Study design: Experimental design.
Study population: Fourteen people with subacute or chronic iSCI (at least 2 weeks after injury) will be included. People with iSCI will be included when having an injury level of C or D on the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale.
Intervention: Participants will visit the Sint Maartenskliniek once and perform overground walking trials in a laboratory setting: regular walking, walking with the ZeroG (BWS system) and walking with the Myosuit (soft exosuit). Each condition consists of 6 walking trials over a distance of 12.5 m.
Main study parameters/endpoints: The main study parameter for dynamic balance during gait will be medio-lateral center of mass excursion. The main study parameter for gait kinematics will be maximum extension of the knee in sagittal plane.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regular walking | Other | Participants perform 6 overground walking trials (12.5 m) without support system. Participants perform all measurements (regular walking, Myosuit, ZeroG) on one single measurement day. | ||
| Myosuit | Device | Participants perform 6 overground walking trials (12.5 m) while wearing the Myosuit. ZeroG and Myosuit intervention will be performed in random order. | ||
| ZeroG | Device | Participants perform 6 overground walking trials (12.5 m) while walking in the ZeroG. ZeroG and Myosuit intervention will be performed in random order. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Dynamic balance during gait: medio-lateral center of mass excursion (cm) | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG. Medio-lateral center of mass excursion | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Gait kinematics: maximum knee extention | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG. Maximum extension of the knee in sagittal plane | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Dynamic balance during gait: step width (cm) | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG. | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Gait kinematics: maximum hip extension |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Sex (man/woman) | Descriptive outcome measure | Subject enrollment |
| Age (years) | Descriptive outcome measure | Subject enrollment |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Bart van den Bemt | Sint Maartenskliniek | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sint Maartenskliniek | Ubbergen | Netherlands |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG. Maximum extension of the hip in sagittal plane |
| At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Gait kinematics: range of motion of the knee | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG. Range of motion of the knee in sagittal plane | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Gait kinematics: range of motion of the hip | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG. Range of motion of the hip in sagittal plane | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Gait kinematics: trunk inclination angle | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG. Trunk inclination angle excursion | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Walking speed (m/s) | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Stride length (m) | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Step time (s) | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the Zero. | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Double support phase (%) | Difference between regular walking, walking with the Myosuit and walking with the ZeroG | At baseline (during regular walking, during walking with the Myosuit, during walking with the ZeroG) |
| Body Mass Index | Descriptive outcome measure. Calculated with weight and height. | Subject enrollment |
| Time since spinal cord injury (years) | Descriptive outcome measure. | Subject enrollment |
| Spinal cord injury classification defined by the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) impairment scale (C or D) | Descriptive outcome measure. The scale has five classification levels (A-E), ranging from complete loss of neural function (A) in the affected area to completely normal (E). | Subject enrollment |
| Level of spinal cord injury | Descriptive outcome measure. There are four sections that impact the level of spinal cord injury: cervical, thoracic, lumbar and sacral. | Subject enrollment |