Acute orthostatic responses during early mobilisation of patients with acquired brain injury - Innowalk pro versus standing frame.

INTRODUCTION

Early mobilisation is paramount in the rehabilitation of patients with acquired brain injuries. However, the effectiveness of mobilisation to standing combined with passive leg movement in mitigating orthostatic intolerance remains uncertain. Hence, we investigated whether participants exhibited better tolerance standing in a motorized standing device with passive leg movements, Innowalk Pro, compared to a traditional standing frame.

METHODS

17 patients with acquired brain injury (<1 year post-injury) performed two sessions in each standing device on four separate days. Maximum standing time was 30 min, less when symptoms of syncope or volitional exhaustion occurred. Besides total standing time, electromyography of thigh muscles, and changes in mean arterial pressure and heart rate were monitored at rest and during standing.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found in standing time, changes in mean arterial pressure or heart rate between standing in Innowalk Pro and the standing frame. However, participants had significantly more thigh muscle activation (p = 0.006) when standing in Innowalk Pro.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobilising participants with a subacute acquired brain injury in a standing frame with motorised passive movements of the lower limbs did, despite higher thigh muscle activation, not lead to better orthostatic tolerance or prolonged standing time compared to a traditional standing frame.