title: Effectiveness of automated locomotor training in patients with acute incomplete spinal cord injury: a randomized controlled multicenter trial.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  A large proportion of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) regain ambulatory function. However, during the first 3 months most of the patients are not able to walk unsupported. To enable ambulatory training at such an early stage the body weight is partially relieved and the leg movements are assisted by two therapists. A more recent approach is the application of robotic based assistance which allows for longer training duration. From motor learning science and studies including patients with stroke, it is known that training effects depend on the duration of the training. Longer trainings result in a better walking function. The aim of the present study is to evaluate if prolonged robot assisted walking training leads to a better walking outcome in patients with incomplete SCI and whether such training is feasible or has undesirable effects.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients from multiple sites with a subacute incomplete SCI and who are not able to walk independently will be randomized to either standard training (3-5 sessions per week, session duration maximum 25 minutes) or an intensive training (3-5 sessions per week, session duration minimum 50 minutes). After 8 weeks of training and 4 months later the walking ability, the occurrence of adverse events and the perceived rate of exertion as well as the patients' impression of change will be compared between groups.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT01147185.
authors: Spinal Cord Injury Center, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland. mwirz@paralab.balgrist.ch
authors: Markus
authors: M
authors: Wirz
authors: Carolien
authors: C
authors: Bastiaenen
authors: Rob
authors: R
authors: de Bie
authors: Volker
authors: V
authors: Dietz
references: Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009 May;23(4):313-9
references: 19118128
references: Physiother Res Int. 2000;5(4):230-40
references: 11129665
references: Spinal Cord. 2001 Dec;39(12):654-6
references: 11781863
references: Phys Ther. 1987 Feb;67(2):206-7
references: 3809245
references: Lancet. 1999 Jul 17;354(9174):191-6
references: 10421300
references: J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000 Nov-Dec;37(6):693-700
references: 11321005
references: Spinal Cord. 2001 May;39(5):252-5
references: 11438840
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Apr;86(4):672-80
references: 15827916
references: Lancet Neurol. 2004 Sep;3(9):528-36
references: 15324721
references: Ann Neurol. 1995 May;37(5):574-82
references: 7755351
references: N Engl J Med. 1989 Jun 8;320(23):1517-21
references: 2657424
references: J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004 Jan;27(1):26-35
references: 14739871
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993 Jun;74(6):612-20
references: 8503751
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1991 Feb;72(2):119-21
references: 1991012
references: Stroke. 2006 Sep;37(9):2348-53
references: 16931787
references: BMC Med. 2010 Mar 24;8:18
references: 20334633
references: Clin Rehabil. 2004 Aug;18(5):529-37
references: 15293487
references: J Spinal Cord Med. 2000 Winter;23(4):289-316
references: 17536300
references: BMJ. 1992 Mar 7;304(6827):609-13
references: 1559090
references: J Spinal Cord Med. 2003 Spring;26 Suppl 1:S50-6
references: 16296564
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Feb;86(2):190-6
references: 15706542
references: Curr Opin Neurol. 2003 Dec;16(6):705-10
references: 14624080
references: Stroke. 2004 Nov;35(11):2529-39
references: 15472114
references: Disabil Rehabil. 2001 Apr 15;23(6):263-8
references: 11336099
references: Brain Res. 1987 May 26;412(1):84-95
references: 3607464
references: Lancet. 2002 Jan 19;359(9302):199-203
references: 11812553
references: Curr Opin Neurol. 2006 Feb;19(1):84-90
references: 16415682