turchEtti 34 , donatella bonaiuti 35 on behalf of italian consensus conference on robotics in neurorehabilitation (cicEronE)1 irccs centro neurolesi bonino-pulejo, Messina, italy; 2 department of Medicine and rehabilitation, polyclinic of Monza, Monzabrianza, italy; 3 spinal cord unit and intensive rehabilitation Medicine, ausl piacenza, Villanova sull'arda and castel san Giovanni, piacenza, italy; 4 Gait and Motion analysis laboratory opa sol et salus, torre pedrera, rimini, italy; 5 department of Experimental and clinical Medicine università politecnica delle Marche (uniVpM), ancona, italy; 6 spinal cord unit, department of rehabilitation Medicine, Gervasutta hospital, udine, italy; 7 azienda sanitaria universitaria friuli centrale (asu-fc), udine, italy; 8 neuromotor and rehabilitation department, laM-Motion analysis laboratory, ausl-irccs reggio Emilia, reggio Emilia, italy; 9 rehabilitation therapeutic center, tramutola, potenza, italy; 10 irccs a. Gemelli university polyclinic foundation, rome, italy; 11 section of neurorehabilitation, department of translational research and new technologies in Medicine and surgery, university of pisa, pisa, italy; 12 Montecatone rehabilitation institute, imola, bologna, italy; 13 unit of neurophysiopathology, ics Maugeri, Montescano institute, pavia, italy; 14 centro protesi Vigorso di budrio, istituto nazionale assicurazione infortuni sul lavoro (inail),

INTRODUCTION: There is growing evidence on the efficacy of gait robotic rehabilitation in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), but most of the studies have focused on gait parameters. Moreover, clear indications on the clinical use of robotics still lack. as part of the cicEroNE italian consensus on robotic rehabilitation, the aim of this systematic review was to investigate the existing evidence concerning the role of lower limb robotic rehabilitation in improving functional recovery in patients with Ms. EVidENcE acQuisitioN: We searched for and systematically reviewed evidence-based studies on gait robotic rehabilitation in Ms, between January 1 st , 2010 and december 31 st , 2020, in the following databases: cochrane library, pEdro, pubMed and Google scholar. the study quality was assessed by the 16-item assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (aMstar 2) and the 10-item pEdro scale for the other research studies. EVidENcE syNthEsis: after an accurate screening, only 17 papers were included in the review, and most of them (13 rct) had a level ii evidence. Most of the studies used the Lokomat as a grounded robotic device, two investigated the efficacy of end-effectors and two powered exoskeletons. Generally speaking, robotic treatment has beneficial effects on gait speed, endurance and balance with comparable outcomes to those of conventional treatments. however, in more severe patients (Edss >6), robotics leads to better functional outcomes. Notably, after gait training with robotics (especially when coupled to virtual reality) Ms patients also reach better non-motor outcomes, including spasticity, fatigue, pain, psychological well-being and quality of life. unfortunately, no clinical indications emerge on the treatment protocols. CONCLUSIONS: The present comprehensive systematic review highlights the potential beneficial role on functional outcomes of the lower limb robotic devices in people with Ms. future studies are warranted to evaluate the role of robotics not only for walking and balance outcomes, but also for other gait-training-related benefits, to identify appropriate outcome measures related to a specific subgroup of MS subjects' disease severity.(Cite this article as: calabrò rs, cassio a, Mazzoli d, andrenelli E, bizzarini E, campanini i, et al.; italian consensus conference on robotics in Neurorehabilitation (cicEroNE). What does evidence tell us about the use of gait robotic devices in patients with multiple sclerosis? a comprehensive systematic review on functional outcomes and clinical recommendations.

Shoulder pain is a common problem and it is responsible for a high proportion of patients presenting to general practice, causing work absenteeism and claims for sickness. A lot of factors and conditions can contribute to shoulder pain. The most prevalent cause is rotator cuff tendinitis; its relevance is correlated not only to its high prevalence rate but also to the fact that is disabling, causing high direct and indirect cost in industrialized country. Other causes of shoulder pain are shoulder impingement syndrome, calcific tendonitis, frozen shoulder, etc. In this context, physical medicine and rehabilitation plays a fundamental role. The conservative approach consists of several interventions. The aim is to decrease shoulder pain and to regain shoulder function, with the goal to reduce the degree of impingement, decreasing swelling and inflammation, and to minimize the risk of further injuries. The purpose of this chapter is to give an overview about shoulder disorders and their conservative treatment by means of physical therapy.

BackgroundThe cause of heel pain among soccer players is multifactorial and is related to repetitive microtrauma due to impact forces involving technical moves, but also the playground, the exercise mode, the recovery time, the climatic conditions and the footwear used.AimTo investigate the aetiology of plantar heel pain of soccer players with the objective of proposing an example of guidelines for treatment.MethodsWe investigated the prevalence and characteristics of inferior heel pain of 1473 professional, semiprofessional and amateur players. All evaluated subjects were submitted to a specific rehabilitation protocol that involved advanced physical therapies and viscoelastic insoles depending on the aetiology of pain.ResultsClinical and instrumental examinations revealed that 960 of 1473 athletes had inferior heel pain. These patients were divided into seven groups based on aetiology: sural nerve compression, abductor digiti minimi compression, atrophy and inflammation of the fat pad, plantar fasciitis, stress injury of the heel spur, stress fracture of the heel bone and heel spur. The proposed rehabilitation treatment aims for a reduction of pain and an early return to sports, with excellent results.ConclusionsAccording to what was observed in the present study, related also to the specific treatment of inferior heel pain, and considering the technological progress achieved in recent years, we can now propose an integrated therapeutic approach to treatment of heel pain, properly differentiated according to specific aetiology.

Primary sarcopenia is considered to be age-related when no other cause is evident, other than aging itself. Secondary sarcopenia should be considered when one or more other causes are evident, such as multiple chronic conditions. Previous studies have reported that low muscle strength and impaired physical performance can be found in chronic diseases, including metabolic disease (diabetes, hypertension, and obesity), arthritis, osteoporosis, cancer, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, neuromuscular disease, and chronic infection. The development of preventive and therapeutic strategies against secondary sarcopenia and wasting disorders in general is an epidemiological need. The planning of a complex rehabilitation program in sarcopenia associated to chronic conditions, in the context of a comprehensive treatment, is made up of a nutritional support, exercise, correction of lifestyles, and the use of advanced physical energies. Therefore, for the purposes of the optimal management, it is essential to identify the pathogenesis and clinical characteristics that can affect the different rehabilitative treatment.

No abstract

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

SummaryIntroduction. Osteoporosis is a systemic disease of the skeleton characterized by a reduction in bone mass and alterations in microarchitecture accompanied by increase in fracture risk, with a relevant decline in quality of life and important social, economic, and health implications, representing one of the most common causes of disability and a major financial item of health cost in many Countries. The best therapy for osteoporosis is prevention, consisting in measures to avoid or slow the onset of the disease. Treatment includes measures aimed at osteoporotic individuals, with or without previous fractures and a high risk of a first or additional fracture. Method. We enrolled thirty post-menopausal osteoporotic women, allocated in the first group underwent a 6-month personalized drug therapy and focused mechanoacoustic vibration (2 sessions per week, each lasting 15 minutes); women allocated in the second group underwent only 6-month personalized drug therapy. Patients were evaluated performing dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and isokinetic machine evaluation, and administration of Tinetti scale and ECOS-16 questionnaire. Result. Show improvement of bone mineral density (BMD) and T-score at the lumbar spine and femoral neck, handgrip strength and isokinetic strength of the knee estensors, balance and gait, and quality of life. Conclusion. Hence, the combined treatment with focused mechano-acoustic vibration and pharmacological therapy has a beneficial effect on BMD and T-score as well as on the muscle strength and quality of life of osteoporotic subjects.KEY WORDS: osteoporosis; post-menopausal women; focused vibration; bone mineral density; T-score; muscle strength.