Back

RObotic WAlking for children who CAnnot WAlk (RoWaCaWa): Feasibility and family impacts and perspectives of a family-led Intervention.

Youngblood, J. L.; Norman, B. M.; Diot, C. M.; Eldred, K.; Dukelow, S. P.; Alazem, H.; McCormick, A.; Zwicker, J. D.; Longmuir, P. E.; Larkin-Kaiser, K. A.; Condliffe, E. G.

2025-12-27 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.64898/2025.12.19.25341914
Show abstract

PurposeTo evaluate the feasibility, impacts, and perspectives of a family-led robotic walking intervention. Materials & MethodsThis single-arm interventional study recruited participants aged [&ge;]4 years with pediatric-onset neuromotor disorders. Participants were lent a robotic walker and recommended to use at least 150min/week for 12-weeks. Robotic walking use, acceptability, practicality and adverse events were tracked. Family goals were measured before and after training period using Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Quality of life was examined using EQ-5D-Y, Carer-QoL, and CP-CHILD. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (median (25th-75th percentile)) and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Qualitative interviews captured family perspectives and were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results15 participants aged 4-23 completed this study. Participants trained 5 (3.5-6) times for 150(82-181) minutes and took 7,544(4,640 - 9,575) steps each week. Adverse events occurred in <1% (16 minor, 1 moderate) of robotic walking sessions. Performance (3.5 (1.9-4.5), p=<0.001) and satisfaction (3.3(3.0-5.0), p=<0.001) of goals increased. Parents described positive changes in social experiences and family interactions and difficulties with the logistics of robotic walking. ConclusionsThis family-led robotic walking intervention resulted in improvements in individual goals, though families did struggle with some logistics of robotic walking, such as; transport and difficulties with the device.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.