Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Letter to the Editor: “Is body-weight-supported treadmill training or robotic-assisted gait training superior to overground gait training and other forms of physiotherapy in people with spinal cord injury? A systematic review”

We read with great interest the systematic review by Mehrholz et al. We consider it as a comprehensive and innovative systematic review and meta-analysis, but we have a question about the data processing. By checking the data between the systematic review and included original studies, we found Mehrholz et al. [1] analyzed post-treatment outcomes rather than the difference between pre-treatment and post-treatment, which is at risk of generating an unreliable result. Not only when between-studies baselines are similar, but also when between-groups baselines are not significantly different, we can directly analyze post-treatment outcomes, and generate a stable result.

Considering the included studies’ district, enrollment criteria, and so on, we observed huge heterogeneity of baseline among partial studies. For instance, in Kapadia [2], subjects were of American Spinal Cord Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) C or D grade, while subjects in Sadeghi [3] were of AIS B and C grade.

Futhermore, we found a huge diversity of baseline between the intervention and control groups in Kapadia [2] and Sadeghi [3]. In Kapadia [2], in the 6-min walk test, subjects achieved 187.9 ± 123.4 m in the BWSTT plus FES group, while they achieved 79.4 ± 83.9 m in the group performing resistance and aerobic training. Meanwhile, in Sadeghi [3], the capacity of 6MWT is 340.00 ± 89.70 m in the BWSTT group, but 685.71 ± 176.51 m in the traditional therapy group. The tremendous diversity at baseline is non-negligible for directly analyzing post-treatment outcomes, because the posttest 6MWT value of the BWSTT group, 640.00 ± 97.99 m, is even lower than the pretest value of the control group, 685.71 ± 176.51 m. Calculating the difference between pretest and posttest, the efficacy of BWSTT is 300 m on average, which is higher than that of the control group (reaching ~130 m on average). Actually, a contrast result was generated by extracting posttest outcomes only (640.00 ± 97.99 versus 814.29 ± 180.51).

In addition, based on our experience and another systematic review published in Spinal Cord [4], the posttest outcome should be replaced by difference between pretest baselines and posttest outcomes when performing meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of merging physiotherapy interventions.

References

  1. Mehrholz J, Harvey LA, Thomas S. Is body-weight-supported treadmill training or robotic-assisted gait training superior to overground gait training and other forms of physiotherapy in people with spinal cord injury? A systematic review. Spinal Cord. 2017;55:722–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kapadia N, Masani K, Craven BC, Giangregorio LM, Hitzig SL, Richards K, et al. A randomized trial of functional electrical stimulation for walking in incomplete spinal cord injury: effects on walking competency. J Spinal Cord Med. 2014;37:511–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sadeghi H, Banitalebi E, Dehkordi M. The effect of body-weight-supported training exercises on functional ambulation profile in patients with paraplegic spinal cord injury. Phys Treat. 2015;4:205–12.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Harvey LA, Glinsky JV, Bowden JL. The effectiveness of 22 commonly administered physiotherapy interventions for people with spinal cord injury: a systematic review. Spinal Cord. 2016;54:914–23.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Genmao Cao.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cao, G. Letter to the Editor: “Is body-weight-supported treadmill training or robotic-assisted gait training superior to overground gait training and other forms of physiotherapy in people with spinal cord injury? A systematic review”. Spinal Cord 57, 434 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-019-0270-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-019-0270-8

Further reading

Search

Quick links