Dynamics of Statokinetic Gait Parameters in Toddlers and Children of Preschool Age with Cerebral Palsy on the Background of Exoskeleton-assisted Rehabilitation

Background. Robotic mechanotherapy is one of the most relevant and promising areas in modern neurorehabilitation. The possibilities of using exoskeletons in the rehabilitation of children of early and preschool age are currently insufficiently studied.

The aim of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of using exoskeletons to correct motor stereotypes and form walking patterns in children of early and preschool age with motor disorders. Materials and methods. The patients were divided into 3 groups: group I consisted of 29 patients with cerebral palsy of preschool age who received traditional rehabilitation procedures, group II — 29 preschool children with cerebral palsy, whose rehabilitation complex included trainings with the ExoAtlet Bambini exoskeleton, and group III — 14 toddlers, whose rehabilitation program included training with a small ExoAtlet Sofia exoskeleton. To analyze the data, modern scales, tests, and hardware and software data were used to assess changes in biomechanical parameters and performance indicators of a particular muscle group.

Results. A clinical assessment against the background of a complex of rehabilitation measures using an exoskeleton by the end of rehabilitation showed a significant improvement in vertical posture, walking, and postural control in general. Correlation analysis conducted at the end of rehabilitation revealed statistically significant relationships between the total number of exoskeleton training sessions, the dynamics of the Hauser index (p = 0.033 in group II, p = 0.045 in group III), and the dynamics of the timed “Up and Go” test (p = 0.038 in group II, p = 0.49 in group III).

Conclusion. The usage of an exoskeleton leads to a statistically significant improvement in the postural control of patients in the study who received a full course of individualized comprehensive rehabilitation using an exoskeleton. The results of the comparative analysis demonstrated not only the higher efficiency of exoskeleton-assisted rehabilitation in toddlers and preschool children compared with traditional methods, but also allowed us to identify key factors predicting the success of this technology for this category of patients.

1. Bykova OV, Platonova AN, Balkanskaia SV, Batysheva TT. Children cerebral palsy and epilepsy: approaches to treatment and rehabilitation. S.S. Korsakov Journal of Neurology and Psychiatry. 2012;112(7-2):64–70. (In Russ).

2. Shcherbak SG, Tereshin AE, Golota AS, Krassii AB. Vertikalizatsiya: obosnovanie klyuchevoi roli v obshchei sisteme reabilitatsii. Medical alphabet. 2010;1(4):32–34. (In Russ).

3. 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):301–306. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-9993(00)90075-3

4. Angulo-Barroso R, Burghardt AR, Lloyd M, Ulrich DA. Physical activity in infants with Down syndrome receiving a treadmill intervention. Infant Behav Dev. 2008;31(2):255–269. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.10.003

5. Bryce M. Muscles Alive: Their Functions Revealed by Electromyography. APTA. 1963;43(4):306–307. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/43.4.306a

6. Daminov VD, Tkachenko PV. Exoscletes in medicine: world experience and clinical practice of the Pyrogov Center. Bulletin of Pirogov National Medical & Surgical Center. 2017;12(4-2):17–22. (In Russ).

7. Straudi S, Fanciullacci C, Martinuzzi C, et al. The effects of robotassisted gait training in progressive multiple sclerosis: A randomized controlled trial. Mult Scler. 2016;22(3):373–384. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458515620933

8. Angulo-Barroso R, Burghardt AR, Lloyd M, Ulrich DA. Physical activity in infants with Down syndrome receiving a treadmill intervention. Infant Behav Dev. 2008;31(2):255–269. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2007.10.003

9. Ashraphova USh, Kupriianova OS, Karmazina EK, et al. A personalized approach to application of robotic mechanotherapy methods in children with cerebral palsy of different age groups (review). Pediatricheskaya farmakologiya — Pediatric pharmacology. 2023;20(6):588–596. (In Russ). doi: https://doi.org/10.15690/pf.v20i6.2668

10. Beretta E, Storm FA, Strazzer S, et al. Effect of Robot-Assisted Gait Training in a Large Population of Children With Motor Impairment Due to Cerebral Palsy or Acquired Brain Injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101(1):106–112. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2019.08.479

11. Gertsik YuG, Ivanova GE, Suvorov AYu. Methods and instruments for active-passive mechanotherapy in healthsaving technologies. Humanities bulletin of BMSTU. 2013;(4):1–6. (In Russ). Доступно по: https://hmbul.bmstu.ru/catalog/prmed/hidden/57.html. Ссылка активна на 15.12.2025.

12. Ashrafova USh, Mamedyarov AM, Karmazina EK, et al. The Effectiveness of Using the HandTutor Hand Simulator and Stabilometric Postural Control Using the Biofeedback Tear in Preschool and Primary School Children with Cerebral Palsy. Pediatricheskaya farmakologiya — Pediatric pharmacology. 2024;21(6):481–491. (In Russ). doi: https://doi.org/10.15690/pf.v21i6.2839

13. Yoo JW, Lee DR, Cha YJ, You SH. Augmented effects of EMG biofeedback interfaced with virtual reality on neuromuscular control and movement coordination during reaching in children with cerebral palsy. NeuroRehabilitation. 2017;40(2):175–185. doi: https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-161402

14. Larina NV, Pavlenko VB, Korsunskaya LL, et al. Rehabilitation possibilities for children with cerebral palsy through the use of robotic devices and biofeedback. Bulletin of Siberian Medicine. 2020;19(3):156–165. (In Russ). doi: https://doi.org/10.20538/1682-03632020-3-156-165

15. Vorobiev AA, Zasypkina OA, Krivonozhkina PS, et al. Current use of exoskeleton and prospects of its implementation in habilitation and rehabilitation of disabled people (analytical review). Journal of Volgograd State Medical University. 2015;(2):9–17. (In Russ).

16. Delgado E, Cumplido C, Ramos J, et al. ATLAS2030 Pediatric Gait Exoskeleton: Changes on Range of Motion, Strength and Spasticity in Children With Cerebral Palsy. A Case Series Study. Front Pediatr. 2021;9:753226. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2021.753226

17. Cumplido-Trasmonte C, Ramos-Rojas J, Delgado-Castillejo E, et al. Effects of ATLAS 2030 gait exoskeleton on strength and range of motion in children with spinal muscular atrophy II: a case series. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022;19(1):75. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-022-01055-x

18. Palisano R, Rosenbaum P, Walter S, et al. Development and reliability of a system to classify gross motor function in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1997;39(4):214–223. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.1997.tb07414.x

19. Fedorov AV. Brief history of exoskeletons. Nauka, tekhnika i obrazovanie. 2017;(3):71–73. (In Russ).

20. Moon BH, Kim JiW. Effects of WALKBOT Robotic Locomotor Training on Balance, Gait in Chronic Stroke. Asia-pacific Journal of Convergent Research Interchange. 2023;9(12):391–400. doi: https://doi.org/10.47116/apjcri.2023.12.32

21. Petrova LN, Shevtsov AV, Petrov AA, Yakhin DKh. The Development of a Passive Exoskeleton for Rehabilitation of the Lower Extremities in Children with Cerebral Palsy. Human. Sport. Medicine. 2019;19(S2):103–109. (In Russ). doi: https://doi.org/10.14529/hsm19s214

22. Nefedeva DL, Abdrakhmanova LI, Bodrova RA. Effectiveness of the Walkbot system in patients with infantile cerebral palsy. Physical and rehabilitation medicine, medical rehabilitation. 2024;6(3):253–262. (In Russ). doi: https://doi.org/10.36425/rehab631151

23. Sukal-Moulton T, Krosschell KJ, GaeblerSpira DJ, Dewald JP. Motor Impairment Factors Related to Brain Injury Timing in Early Hemiparesis. Part I: Expression of Upper-Extremity Weakness. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014;28(1):13–23. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968313500564

24. Suponeva NA, Yusupova DG, Ilyina KA, et al. Validation of the Modified Ashworth scale in Russia. Annals of clinical and experimental neurology. 2020;14(1):89–96. doi: https://doi.org/10.25692/ACEN.2020.1.10

25. John J. Grading of muscle power: comparison of MRC and analogue scales by physiotherapists. Medical Research Council. Int J Rehabil Res. 1984;7(2):173–181.

26. Pfeiffer G, Wicklein EM, Ratusinski T, et al. Disability and quality of life in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;70(4):548–550. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.70.4.548

27. Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991;39(2):142–148. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x

28. Dhote SN, Khatri PA, Ganvir SS. Reliability of “Modified timed up and go” test in children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Neurosci. 2012;7(2):96–100. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/18171745.102564