OBJECTIVE: To compare the functional outcomes attained by persons with paraplegia using the Walkabout Orthosis (WO) and the Isocentric Reciprocal Gait Orthosis (IRGO). DESIGN: A randomized crossover design. PATIENTS: Ten subjects with complete lesions between T9 to T12. INTERVENTIONS: Over two 8-week periods, subjects were taught to use each orthosis in conjunction with elbow crutches. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: After each 8-week training period, subjects were assessed on their ability to perform five different sets of key skills associated with functional ambulation. RESULTS: There were no differences between orthoses in the ability of subjects to don and doff the orthoses, get up and down stairs and curbs, or walk on a flat surface. Subjects required significantly more assistance when using the WO to walk over inclined surfaces (median IRGO = "independent", median WO = "minimal assistance"; p = 0.03) but less assistance when using the WO to get from sitting to standing and standing to sitting (median IRGO = "moderate assistance", median WO = "minimal assistance"; p = 0.03). In addition, subjects walked significantly faster with the IRGO both on the flat (mean IRGO = 0.34 m/sec +/- 0.18, mean WO = 0.14 m/sec +/- 0.12; p = 0.002) and on inclined surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: Although it is easier to stand up and sit down with the WO, the IRGO facilitated a faster and more independent gait. Neither orthosis enabled subjects to be fully independent in the key skills necessary for functional ambulation after 8 weeks of training.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help

• DOI
• PubMed
• PDF locator
• publisher