Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
Published in: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Review

Influence of body weight unloading on human gait characteristics: a systematic review

Authors: Salil Apte, Michiel Plooij, Heike Vallery

Published in: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Body weight support (BWS) systems have shown promise as rehabilitation tools for neurologically impaired individuals. This paper reviews the experiment-based research on BWS systems with the aim: (1) To investigate the influence of body weight unloading (BWU) on gait characteristics; (2) To study whether the effects of BWS differ between treadmill and overground walking and (3) To investigate if modulated BWU influences gait characteristics less than unmodulated BWU.

Method

A systematic literature search was conducted in the following search engines: Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Statistical analysis was used to quantify the effects of BWU on gait parameters.

Results

54 studies of experiments with healthy and neurologically impaired individuals walking in a BWS system were included and 32 of these were used for the statistical analysis. Literature was classified using three distinctions: (1) treadmill or overground walking; (2) the type of subjects and (3) the nature of unloading force. Only 27% studies were based on neurologically impaired subjects; a low number considering that they are the primary user group for BWS systems. The studies included BWU from 5% to 100% and the 30% and 50% BWU conditions were the most widely studied. The number of participants varied from 1 to 28, with an average of 12. It was seen that due to the increase in BWU level, joint moments, muscle activity, energy cost of walking and ground reaction forces (GRF) showed higher reduction compared to gait spatio-temporal and joint kinematic parameters. The influence of BWU on kinematic and spatio-temporal gait parameters appeared to be limited up to 30% unloading. 5 gait characteristics presented different behavior in response to BWU for overground and treadmill walking. Remaining 21 gait characteristics showed similar behavior but different magnitude of change for overground and treadmill walking. Modulated unloading force generally led to less difference from the 0% condition than unmodulated unloading.

Conclusion

This review has shown that BWU influences all gait characteristics, albeit with important differences between the kinematic, spatio-temporal and kinetic characteristics. BWU showed stronger influence on the kinetic characteristics of gait than on the spatio-temporal parameters and the kinematic characteristics. It was ascertained that treadmill and overground walking can alter the effects of BWU in a different manner. Our results indicate that task-specific gait training is likely to be achievable at a BWU level of 30% and below.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Visintin M, Barbeau H, Korner-Bitensky N, Mayo NE. A new approach to retrain gait in stroke patients through body weight support and treadmill stimulation. Stroke. 1998; 29(6):1122–8.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Hesse S, Bertelt C, Jahnke M, Schaffrin A, Baake P, Malezic M, Mauritz K. Treadmill training with partial body weight support compared with physiotherapy in nonambulatory hemiparetic patients. Stroke. 1995; 26(6):976–81.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Hornby TG, Zemon DH, Campbell D. Robotic-assisted, body-weight-supported treadmill training in individuals following motor incomplete spinal cord injury. Phys Ther. 2005; 85(1):52.PubMed
4.
Barbeau H, Visintin M. Optimal outcomes obtained with body-weight support combined with treadmill training in stroke subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003; 84(10):1458–65.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Miyai I, Fujimoto Y, Ueda Y, Yamamoto H, Nozaki S, Saito T, Kang J. Treadmill training with body weight support: its effect on parkinson’s disease. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000; 81(7):849–52.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Schindl MR, Forstner C, Kern H, Hesse S. Treadmill training with partial body weight support in nonambulatory patients with cerebral palsy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000; 81(3):301–6.PubMedCrossRef
7.
O’Sullivan SB, Schmitz TJ, Fulk G. Physical Rehabilitation. Philadephia: FA Davis; 2013.
8.
Sousa CO, Barela JA, Prado-Medeiros CL, Salvini TF, Barela AM. The use of body weight support on ground level: an alternative strategy for gait training of individuals with stroke. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2009; 6(1):43.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
9.
Wernig A, Müller S. Laufband locomotion with body weight support improved walking in persons with severe spinal cord injuries. Spinal Cord. 1992; 30(4):229–38.CrossRef
10.
Dietz V. Body weight supported gait training: from laboratory to clinical setting. Brain Res Bull. 2009;78(1).
11.
Werner C, Von Frankenberg S, Treig T, Konrad M, Hesse S. Treadmill training with partial body weight support and an electromechanical gait trainer for restoration of gait in subacute stroke patients. Stroke. 2002; 33(12):2895–901.PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Field-Fote EC, Tepavac D. Improved intralimb coordination in people with incomplete spinal cord injury following training with body weight support and electrical stimulation. Phys Ther. 2002; 82(7):707.PubMed
14.
Pang MY, Yang JF. The initiation of the swing phase in human infant stepping: importance of hip position and leg loading. J Physiol. 2000; 528(2):389–404.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
15.
Winstein CJ, Wolf SL, Dromerick AW, Lane CJ, Nelsen MA, Lewthwaite R, Cen SY, Azen SP. Effect of a task-oriented rehabilitation program on upper extremity recovery following motor stroke: the icare randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2016; 315(6):571–81.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
16.
Richards C, Malouin F, Dean C. Gait in stroke: assessment and rehabilitation. Clin Geriatr Med. 1999; 15(4):833–55.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Hicks AL, Ginis KM. Treadmill training after spinal cord injury: it’s not just about the walking. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008; 45(2):241.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Smith AC, Knikou M. A review on locomotor training after spinal cord injury: Reorganization of spinal neuronal circuits and recovery of motor function. Neural Plasticity. 2016; 2016:20. Article ID 1216258.
19.
Kleim JA, Jones TA. Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008; 51(1):225–39.CrossRef
20.
Barbeau H, Wainberg M, Finch L. Description and application of a system for locomotor rehabilitation. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1987; 25(3):341–4.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Dietz V, Colombo G, Jensen L, Baumgartner L. Locomotor capacity of spinal cord in paraplegic patients. Ann Neurol. 1995; 37(5):574–82.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Harkema SJ, Hurley SL, Patel UK, Requejo PS, Dobkin BH, Edgerton VR. Human lumbosacral spinal cord interprets loading during stepping. J Neurophys. 1997; 77(2):797–811.CrossRef
23.
Harkema SJ, Hillyer J, Schmidt-Read M, Ardolino E, Sisto SA, Behrman AL. Locomotor training: as a treatment of spinal cord injury and in the progression of neurologic rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 93(9):1588–97.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Phadke CP, Wu SS, Thompson FJ, Behrman AL. Comparison of soleus h-reflex modulation after incomplete spinal cord injury in 2 walking environments: treadmill with body weight support and overground. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007; 88(12):1606–13.PubMedCrossRef
25.
26.
Aaslund MK, Moe-Nilssen R. Treadmill walking with body weight support: Effect of treadmill, harness and body weight support systems. Gait Posture. 2008; 28(2):303–8.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Mastos M, Miller K, Eliasson A-C, Imms C. Goal-directed training: linking theories of treatment to clinical practice for improved functional activities in daily life. Clin Rehabil. 2007; 21(1):47–55.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Prieto GA, Andrés AI, Venkatakrishnan A, Malik WQ, Dietz V, Rymer WZ. Rehabilitation technologies for spinal injury. In: Emerging Therapies in Neurorehabilitation II. New York: Springer: 2016. p. 65–85.
29.
Gazzani F, Fadda A, Torre M, Macellari V. Ward: a pneumatic system for body weight relief in gait rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 2000; 8(4):506–13.PubMedCrossRef
30.
31.
Vallery H, Lutz P, Von Zitzewitz J, Rauter G, Fritschi M, Everarts C, Ronsse R, Curt A, Bolliger M. Multidirectional transparent support for overground gait training. In: Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), 2013 IEEE International Conference On. Seattle: IEEE: 2013. p. 1–7.
32.
Franz JR, Glauser M, Riley PO, Della Croce U, Newton F, Allaire PE, Kerrigan DC. Physiological modulation of gait variables by an active partial body weight support system. J Biomech. 2007; 40(14):3244–50.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Jezernik S, Colombo G, Keller T, Frueh H, Morari M. Robotic orthosis lokomat: A rehabilitation and research tool. Neuromodulation Technol Neural Interface. 2003; 6(2):108–15.CrossRef
34.
Hesse S, Uhlenbrock D, et al. A mechanized gait trainer for restoration of gait. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2000; 37(6):701–8.PubMed
35.
Hewes DE. Reduced-gravity simulators for studies of man’s mobility in space and on the moon. Hum Factors. 1969; 11(5):419–31.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Newman DJ, Alexander HL. Human locomotion and workload for simulated lunar and martian environments. Acta Astronautica. 1993; 29(8):613–20.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Tuckey J, Greenwood R. Rehabilitation after severe guillain–barre syndrome: the use of partial body weight support. Physiother Res Int. 2004; 9(2):96–103.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Swinnen E, Beckwée D, Pinte D, Meeusen R, Baeyens J-P, Kerckhofs E. Treadmill training in multiple sclerosis: can body weight support or robot assistance provide added value? a systematic review. Multiple Sclerosis Int. 2012;2012:240274. Article ID 240274.
39.
Ulrich DA, Ulrich BD, Angulo-Kinzler RM, Yun J. Treadmill training of infants with down syndrome: evidence-based developmental outcomes. Pediatrics. 2001; 108(5):84.CrossRef
40.
Mutlu A, Krosschell K, Spira DG. Treadmill training with partial body-weight support in children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2009; 51(4):268–75.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Damiano DL, DeJong SL. A systematic review of the effectiveness of treadmill training and body weight support in pediatric rehabilitation. J Neurol Phys Ther JNPT. 2009; 33(1):27.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Willoughby KL, Dodd KJ, Shields N. A systematic review of the effectiveness of treadmill training for children with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil. 2009; 31(24):1971–9.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Finch L, Barbeau H, Arsenault B, et al. Influence of body weight support on normal human gait: development of a gait retraining strategy. Phys Ther. 1991; 71(11):842–55.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Hurt CP, Burgess JK, Brown DA. Limb contribution to increased self-selected walking speeds during body weight support in individuals poststroke. Gait Posture. 2015; 41(3):857–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
45.
Worthen-Chaudhari L, Schmiedeler JP, Basso DM. Training conditions that best reproduce the joint powers of unsupported walking. Gait Posture. 2015; 41(2):597–602.PubMedCrossRef
46.
David D, Regnaux J-P, Lejaille M, Louis A, Bussel B, Lofaso F. Oxygen consumption during machine-assisted and unassisted walking: a pilot study in hemiplegic and healthy humans. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006; 87(4):482–489.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Klarner T, Chan HK, Wakeling JM, Lam T. Patterns of muscle coordination vary with stride frequency during weight assisted treadmill walking. Gait Posture. 2010; 31(3):360–5.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Delussu AS, Morone G, Iosa M, Bragoni M, Traballesi M, Paolucci S. Physiological responses and energy cost of walking on the gait trainer with and without body weight support in subacute stroke patients. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014; 11(1):54.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
49.
Fenuta AM, Hicks AL. Metabolic demand and muscle activation during different forms of bodyweight supported locomotion in men with incomplete sci. BioMed Res Int. 2014; 2014:10. Article ID 632765.CrossRef
50.
Swinnen E, Baeyens J-P, Hens G, Knaepen K, Beckwée D, Michielsen M, Clijsen R, Kerckhofs E. Body weight support during robot-assisted walking: Influence on the trunk and pelvis kinematics. NeuroRehabilitation. 2015; 36(1):81–91.PubMedCrossRef
51.
van Kammen K, Boonstra AM, van der Woude LH, Reinders-Messelink HA, den Otter R. The combined effects of guidance force, bodyweight support and gait speed on muscle activity during able-bodied walking in the lokomat. Clin Biomech. 2016; 36:65–73.CrossRef
52.
Kuno H, Yamamoto N, Kurokawa N, Yamamoto T, Tagawa Y. Characteristic activities of lower limbs with body weight support ratio. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE. San Diego: IEEE: 2012. p. 4800–4803.
53.
Letko W, Spady A, Hewes DE. Problems of man?s adaptation to the lunar environment. In: Second Symposium on the Role of the Vestibular Organs in Space Exploration. Washington DC: Aerospace Medicine and Biology, NASA Technical Reports: 1966. p. 25–32.
54.
Harris RL, Hewes DE, Spady Jr AA. Comparative measurements of man’s walking and running gaits in earth and simulated lunar gravity. Hampton: NASA Langley Research Center; 1966. Document ID - 19660019917.
55.
Sylos-Labini F, Ivanenko YP, Cappellini G, Portone A, MacLellan MJ, Lacquaniti F. Changes of gait kinematics in different simulators of reduced gravity. J Motor Behav. 2013; 45(6):495–505.CrossRef
56.
Roberts JF. Walking responses under lunar and low gravity conditions. AMRL-TR 6570th, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory. 1963.
57.
Haber F, Haber H. Possible methods of producing the gravity-free state for medical research. J Aviat Med. 1950; 21:395–400.PubMed
58.
Abbott HM, Duddy JH. Weightless simulation using water immersion techniques: An annotated bibliography. Sunnyvale: LAC-SB-65-2, Lockheed Aircraft Corporation; 1965.CrossRef
59.
De Witt JK, Perusek GP, Lewandowski BE, Gilkey KM, Savina MC, Samorezov S, Edwards WB. Locomotion in simulated and real microgravity: horizontal suspension vs. parabolic flight. Aviation Space Environ Med. 2010; 81(12):1092–99.CrossRef
60.
Donelan JM, Kram R. The effect of reduced gravity on the kinematics of human walking: a test of the dynamic similarity hypothesis for locomotion. J Exp Biol. 1997; 200(24):3193–201.PubMed
61.
Farley CT, McMahon TA. Energetics of walking and running: insights from simulated reduced-gravity experiments. J Appl Physiol. 1992; 73(6):2709–12.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Kram R, Domingo A, Ferris DP. Effect of reduced gravity on the preferred walk-run transition speed. J Exp Biol. 1997; 200(4):821–6.PubMed
63.
Whalen R, Breit G, Schwandt D, Wade CE. Simulation of hypo-and hyper-gravity locomotion. 1994.
64.
Cutuk A, Groppo ER, Quigley EJ, White KW, Pedowitz RA, Hargens AR. Ambulation in simulated fractional gravity using lower body positive pressure: cardiovascular safety and gait analyses. J Appl Physiol. 2006; 101(3):771–7.PubMedCrossRef
65.
Grabowski AM, Kram R. Effects of velocity and weight support on ground reaction forces and metabolic power during running. J Appl Biomech. 2008; 24(3):288–97.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Sylos-Labini F, Lacquaniti F, Ivanenko YP. Human locomotion under reduced gravity conditions: biomechanical and neurophysiological considerations. BioMed Res Int. 2014; 2014:12. Article ID 547242.CrossRef
67.
Richter C, Braunstein B, Winnard A, Nasser M, Weber T. Human biomechanical and cardiopulmonary responses to partial gravity-a systematic review. Front Psychol. 2017; 8:583.CrossRef
68.
Richards CL, Malouin F, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams J, Bouchard J-P, Brunet D. Task-specific physical therapy for optimization of gait recovery in acute stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993; 74(6):612–20.PubMedCrossRef
69.
Lee SJ, Hidler J. Biomechanics of overground vs. treadmill walking in healthy individuals. J Appl Physiol. 2008; 104(3):747–55.PubMedCrossRef
70.
Field-Fote EC, Roach KE. Influence of a locomotor training approach on walking speed and distance in people with chronic spinal cord injury: a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther. 2011; 91(1):48–60.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
71.
Franz JR, Riley PO, Dicharry J, Allaire PE, Kerrigan DC. Gait synchronized force modulation during the stance period of one limb achieved by an active partial body weight support system. J Biomech. 2008; 41(15):3116–20.PubMedCrossRef
72.
Jung T, Kim Y, Kelly LE, Abel MF. Biomechanical and perceived differences between overground and treadmill walking in children with cerebral palsy. Gait Posture. 2016; 45:1–6.PubMedCrossRef
73.
Lewek MD. The influence of body weight support on ankle mechanics during treadmill walking. J Biomech. 2011; 44(1):128–33.PubMedCrossRef
74.
Serrao M, Spaich EG, Andersen OK. Modulating effects of bodyweight unloading on the lower limb nociceptive withdrawal reflex during symmetrical stance. Clin Neurophysiol. 2012; 123(5):1035–43.PubMedCrossRef
75.
Ferris DP, Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Farley CT, Dyhre-Poulsen P. Soleus h-reflex gain in humans walking and running under simulated reduced gravity. J Physiol. 2001; 530(1):167–80.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
76.
McGowan C, Kram R, Neptune R. Modulation of leg muscle function in response to altered demand for body support and forward propulsion during walking. J Biomech. 2009; 42(7):850–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
77.
Neter J, Kutner MH, Nachtsheim CJ, Wasserman W. Applied Linear Statistical Models, vol. 4. Chicago: Irwin; 1996.
78.
Stephens MJ, Yang JF. Loading during the stance phase of walking in humans increases the extensor emg amplitude but does not change the duration of the step cycle. Exp Brain Res. 1999; 124(3):363–70.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Ivanenko Y, Grasso R, Macellari V, Lacquaniti F. Control of foot trajectory in human locomotion: role of ground contact forces in simulated reduced gravity. J Neurophysiol. 2002; 87(6):3070–89.PubMedCrossRef
80.
Van Hedel H, Tomatis L, Müller R. Modulation of leg muscle activity and gait kinematics by walking speed and bodyweight unloading. Gait Posture. 2006; 24(1):35–45.PubMedCrossRef
81.
Thomas EE, De Vito G, Macaluso A. Physiological costs and temporo-spatial parameters of walking on a treadmill vary with body weight unloading and speed in both healthy young and older women. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2007; 100(3):293–9.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Aaslund MK, Moe-Nilssen R. Treadmill walking with body weight support: Effect of treadmill, harness and body weight support systems. Gait Posture. 2008; 28(2):303–8.PubMedCrossRef
83.
Van Kammen K, Boonstra A, Reinders-Messelink H, den Otter R. The combined effects of body weight support and gait speed on gait related muscle activity: a comparison between walking in the lokomat exoskeleton and regular treadmill walking. PLOS ONE. 2014; 9(9):107323.CrossRef
84.
Threlkeld AJ, Cooper LD, Monger BP, Craven AN, Haupt HG. Temporospatial and kinematic gait alterations during treadmill walking with body weight suspension. Gait Posture. 2003; 17(3):235–45.PubMedCrossRef
85.
Hesse S, Konrad M, Uhlenbrock D. Treadmill walking with partial body weight support versus floor walking in hemiparetic subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999; 80(4):421–7.PubMedCrossRef
86.
Patiño M, Gonçalves A, Monteiro B, Santos I, Barela A, Barela J. Kinematic, kinetic and electromyographic characteristics of young adults walking with and without partial body weight support. Braz J Phys Ther. 2007; 11(1):19–25.CrossRef
87.
Burgess JK, Weibel GC, Brown DA. Overground walking speed changes when subjected to body weight support conditions for nonimpaired and post stroke individuals. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010; 7(1):6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
88.
Fischer AG, Wolf A. Assessment of the effects of body weight unloading on overground gait biomechanical parameters. Clin Biomech. 2015; 30(5):454–61.CrossRef
89.
90.
Goldberg SR, Stanhope SJ. Sensitivity of joint moments to changes in walking speed and body-weight-support are interdependent and vary across joints. J Biomech. 2013; 46(6):1176–83.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
91.
Barela AM, Freitas PBd, Celestino ML, Camargo MR, Barela JA. Ground reaction forces during level ground walking with body weight unloading. Braz J Phys Ther. 2014; 18(6):572–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
92.
McGowan CP, Neptune RR, Kram R. Independent effects of weight and mass on plantar flexor activity during walking: implications for their contributions to body support and forward propulsion. J Appl Physiol. 2008; 105(2):486–94.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
93.
Griffin TM, Tolani NA, Kram R. Walking in simulated reduced gravity: mechanical energy fluctuations and exchange. J Appl Physiol. 1999; 86(1):383–90.PubMedCrossRef
94.
Colby SM, Kirkendall DT, Bruzga RF. Electromyographic analysis and energy expenditure of harness supported treadmill walking: implications for knee rehabilitation. Gait Posture. 1999; 10(3):200–5.PubMedCrossRef
95.
Danielsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. Oxygen consumption during treadmill walking with and without body weight support in patients with hemiparesis after stroke and in healthy subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000; 81(7):953–7.PubMedCrossRef
96.
Grabowski A, Farley CT, Kram R. Independent metabolic costs of supporting body weight and accelerating body mass during walking. J Appl Physiol. 2005; 98(2):579–83.PubMedCrossRef
97.
Ferris D, Gordon K, Beres-Jones J, Harkema S. Muscle activation during unilateral stepping occurs in the nonstepping limb of humans with clinically complete spinal cord injury. Spinal cord. 2004; 42(1):14.PubMedCrossRef
98.
Wang P, Low K, Lim PA, McGregor A. Modulation of weight off-loading level over body-weight supported locomotion training. In: Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), 2011 IEEE International Conference On. Zurich: IEEE: 2011. p. 1–6.
99.
Fenuta A, Hicks AL. Muscle activation during body weight-supported locomotion while using the zerog. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014; 51(1):51–8.PubMedCrossRef
100.
Dietz V, Leenders K, Colombo G. Leg muscle activation during gait in parkinson’s disease: influence of body unloading. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Electromyography and Motor Control. 1997; 105(5):400–5.
101.
Dietz V, Colombo G. Influence of body load on the gait pattern in parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 1998; 13(2):255–61.PubMedCrossRef
102.
Fischer AG, Debbi EM, Wolf A. Effects of body weight unloading on electromyographic activity during overground walking. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2015; 25(4):709–14.PubMedCrossRef
103.
Harvill L, Cowley M, Rajulu S. Human performance in simulated reduced gravity environments. 2015.
104.
105.
Pavei G, Biancardi CM, Minetti AE. Skipping vs. running as the bipedal gait of choice in hypogravity. J Appl Physiol. 2015; 119(1):93–100.PubMedCrossRef
106.
Alexander RM. Walking and running: Legs and leg movements are subtly adapted to minimize the energy costs of locomotion. Am Sci. 1984; 72(4):348–54.
107.
Farley CT, Ferris DP. 10 biomechanics of walking and running: Center of mass movements to muscle action. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1998; 26(1):253–86.PubMed
108.
Ivanenko YP, Labini FS, Cappellini G, Macellari V, McIntyre J, Lacquaniti F. Gait transitions in simulated reduced gravity. J Appl Physiol. 2011; 110(3):781–8.PubMedCrossRef
109.
Fischer AG, Wolf A. Body weight unloading modifications on frontal plane joint moments, impulses and center of pressure during overground gait. Clin Biomech. 2016; 39:77–83.CrossRef
110.
Margaria R, Cavagna G. Human locomotion in subgravity. Aerosp Med. 1964; 35:1140–6.PubMed
111.
Shavelson R. Lunar gravity simulation and its effect on human performance. Hum Factors. 1968; 10(4):393–402.PubMedCrossRef
112.
Davis B, Cavanagh P. Simulating reduced gravity: a review of biomechanical issues pertaining to human locomotion. Aviat Space Environ Med. 1993; 64(6):557–66.PubMed
113.
Alton F, Baldey L, Caplan S, Morrissey M. A kinematic comparison of overground and treadmill walking. Clin Biomech. 1998; 13(6):434–40.CrossRef
114.
Harris-Love ML, Forrester LW, Macko RF, Silver KH, Smith GV. Hemiparetic gait parameters in overground versus treadmill walking. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2001; 15(2):105–12.PubMedCrossRef
115.
Riley PO, Paolini G, Della Croce U, Paylo KW, Kerrigan DC. A kinematic and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill walking in healthy subjects. Gait Posture. 2007; 26(1):17–24.PubMedCrossRef
116.
Parvataneni K, Ploeg L, Olney SJ, Brouwer B. Kinematic, kinetic and metabolic parameters of treadmill versus overground walking in healthy older adults. Clin Biomech. 2009; 24(1):95–100.CrossRef
117.
Watt JR, Franz JR, Jackson K, Dicharry J, Riley PO, Kerrigan DC. A three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic comparison of overground and treadmill walking in healthy elderly subjects. Clin Biomech. 2010; 25(5):444–9.CrossRef
118.
Stoquart G, Detrembleur C, Lejeune T. Effect of speed on kinematic, kinetic, electromyographic and energetic reference values during treadmill walking. Neurophysiol Clinique/Clin Neurophysiol. 2008; 38(2):105–16.CrossRef
119.
Lazzarini BSR, Kataras TJ. Treadmill walking is not equivalent to overground walking for the study of walking smoothness and rhythmicity in older adults. Gait Posture. 2016; 46:42–6.CrossRef
120.
Meyns P, Van de Crommert H, Rijken H, Van Kuppevelt D, Duysens J. Locomotor training with body weight support in sci: Emg improvement is more optimally expressed at a low testing speed. Spinal cord. 2014; 52(12):887–93.PubMedCrossRef
121.
Burnfield JM, Buster TW, Goldman AJ, Corbridge LM, Harper-Hanigan K. Partial body weight support treadmill training speed influences paretic and non-paretic leg muscle activation, stride characteristics, and ratings of perceived exertion during acute stroke rehabilitation. Hum Mov Sci. 2016; 47:16–28.PubMedCrossRef
122.
Ye J, Reyes FA, Yu H. A novel robotic walker for over-ground gait rehabilitation. In: Converging Clinical and Engineering Research on Neurorehabilitation II. New York: Springer: 2017. p. 1223–7.
123.
Dobkin BH. An overview of treadmill locomotor training with partial body weight support: a neurophysiologically sound approach whose time has come for randomized clinical trials. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 1999; 13(3):157–65.CrossRef
124.
Van Thuc T, Prattico F, Yamamoto S-i. A novel treadmill body weight support system using pneumatic artificial muscle actuators: a comparison between active body weight support system and counter weight system. In: World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, June 7-12, 2015, Toronto, Canada. Toronto: Springer: 2015. p. 1115–9.
125.
Munawar H, Patoglu V. Gravity-assist: A series elastic body weight support system with inertia compensation. In: Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference On. Daejeon: IEEE: 2016. p. 3036–41.
126.
Yusuf S, Collins R, Peto R. Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials?. Stat Med. 1984; 3(4):409–20.PubMedCrossRef
127.
Giffin RB, Lebovitz Y, English RA, et al. Transforming Clinical Research in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2010.
128.
Viergever RF, Li K. Trends in global clinical trial registration: an analysis of numbers of registered clinical trials in different parts of the world from 2004 to 2013. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(9):008932.CrossRef
129.
Lo AC. Clinical designs of recent robot rehabilitation trials. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 91(11):204–16.CrossRef
130.
Morbi A, Ahmadi M, Nativ A. Gaitenable: An omnidirectional robotic system for gait rehabilitation. In: Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA), 2012 International Conference On. Chengdu: IEEE: 2012. p. 936–41.
Metadata
Title
Influence of body weight unloading on human gait characteristics: a systematic review
Authors
Salil Apte
Michiel Plooij
Heike Vallery
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1743-0003
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0380-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research

On the design of EEG-based movement decoders for completely paralyzed stroke patients

Research

Reliability, validity, and clinical feasibility of a rapid and objective assessment of post-stroke deficits in hand proprioception

Research

Effect of noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation in community-dwelling elderly people: a randomised controlled trial

Research

Myocontrol is closed-loop control: incidental feedback is sufficient for scaling the prosthesis force in routine grasping

Research

Development of a 3D, networked multi-user virtual reality environment for home therapy after stroke

Research

The effects of gait training using powered lower limb exoskeleton robot on individuals with complete spinal cord injury