Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorB. V., Clinton Wilson
dc.contributor.authorD. S., Mohan Varma
dc.date.accessioned2026-02-17T21:46:01Z
dc.date.available2026-02-17T21:46:01Z
dc.date.copyright1/17/2025 12:00:00 AM
dc.date.issued2025
dc.identifier.issn1932-6181
dc.identifier.othermed_019_01_010801.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4310606
dc.description.abstractThis systematic review was aimed at identifying cost-effective outcome assessment metrics to perform clinical trials for assessing the efficacy of novel, low-cost gait training devices. The search was conducted by the investigators through electronic databases, namely, SCOPUS (91), Web of Science (93), PubMed (141), and Cochrane Library (164), from origination to Mar. 31, 2024. The study design was a preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) style systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of robotic gait training devices (RGTDs) that treated stroke patients. Based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria, 17 randomized controlled trials were studied to identify suitable outcome assessment measures. This involved 705 patients at different stages of stroke, who were treated with different intervention durations, devices, randomization, and blinding methods. It was observed from the extensive clinical trials with the RGTDs that it was tested with a variety of assessment methods. Cost-effective outcome assessment measures that require commonly available materials are chosen and discussed in this review. It is identified that the most extensively used measures possess concurrent validity, sufficient inter-rater, intra-rater, and test-retest reliability. Clinical trials with a sophisticated setup cannot be afforded by clinics in low-income countries. It is vital to identify assessment methods that require commonly available materials that do not incur huge material costs. The methods discussed in this review can be administered without special training. This can facilitate quantifying and comparing the efficacy of these devices through clinical trials and multicentric investigations.
dc.publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
dc.titleCost-Effective Clinical Methods to Evaluate the Efficacy of Gait Training Devices: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
dc.typeJournal Paper
dc.journal.volume19
dc.journal.issue1
dc.journal.titleJournal of Medical Devices
dc.identifier.doi10.1115/1.4067349
dc.journal.fristpage10801-1
dc.journal.lastpage10801-10
dc.page10
dc.treeJournal of Medical Devices:;2025:;volume( 019 ):;issue: 001
dc.contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record