Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries · 2025
The effect of robot-assisted training on burn rehabilitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Huang Da, Zheng Yan, Xu Ming, Huang Wenying
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy of robot-assisted training (RAT) in improving the physical rehabilitation outcomes of burn patients and to establish a clinical basis for its broader application.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of RAT in burns rehabilitation were searched from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang Data (WanFang), and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM) databases (as of March 18, 2025). The quality of the study was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3, and data that could not be synthesized were presented in a descriptive manner.
RESULTS: Nine RCTs, involving 531 patients, were included. RAT significantly improved hand grip strength (MD=1.2, 95 % CI: 0.21-2.19, p = 0.02) and lower limb 6-minute walking distance (6MWT: MD=73.06, 95 % CI: 1.18-144.93, p = 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in Functional Ambulation Category (FAC) scores (MD=0.4, 95 % CI: -0.09-0.9, p = 0.11) or pain reduction (MD=0.29, 95 % CI: -0.22-0.8, p = 0.26). The certainty of all the evidence was shown to be very low. Multiple descriptive statistical analysis highlighted RAT's superiority in enhancing finger mobility, hand dexterity, and select gait parameters.
CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review suggests that incorporating RAT into conventional physiotherapy may offer some benefits for the functional rehabilitation of upper and lower limbs in burn patients; however, the certainty of the evidence supporting this recommendation is very low. Consequently, high-quality research is required to validate the efficacy of RAT in future studies.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of RAT in burns rehabilitation were searched from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wan Fang Data (WanFang), and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM) databases (as of March 18, 2025). The quality of the study was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3, and data that could not be synthesized were presented in a descriptive manner.
RESULTS: Nine RCTs, involving 531 patients, were included. RAT significantly improved hand grip strength (MD=1.2, 95 % CI: 0.21-2.19, p = 0.02) and lower limb 6-minute walking distance (6MWT: MD=73.06, 95 % CI: 1.18-144.93, p = 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in Functional Ambulation Category (FAC) scores (MD=0.4, 95 % CI: -0.09-0.9, p = 0.11) or pain reduction (MD=0.29, 95 % CI: -0.22-0.8, p = 0.26). The certainty of all the evidence was shown to be very low. Multiple descriptive statistical analysis highlighted RAT's superiority in enhancing finger mobility, hand dexterity, and select gait parameters.
CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review suggests that incorporating RAT into conventional physiotherapy may offer some benefits for the functional rehabilitation of upper and lower limbs in burn patients; however, the certainty of the evidence supporting this recommendation is very low. Consequently, high-quality research is required to validate the efficacy of RAT in future studies.