An interventional study of High-tech rehabilitative treatment and Rehabilitation in Critical Illness Myopathy, Guillain Barré Syndrome and Critical Illness Polyneuromyopathy (CIPNM), sponsored by Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri SpA. Recruiting at 8 sites in Italy. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-04.
Sponsored by Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri SpA · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
The goal of this study is determine if a high-tech rehabilitation circuit is more effective than usual rehabilitation methods in improving functional outcome, particularly balance control, for patients with acute neuromuscolar diseases. The main question it aims to answer is:
Are high-tech rehabilitation interventions, including robotic systems, virtual reality, and stabilometric platforms, more effective than traditional rehabilitation methods in improving balance, motor function, fatigue levels, sarcopenia, cognitive engagement, and overall quality of life in patients with acute neuromuscular diseases (NMDs)? Researchers will compare a robotic treatment group, that consists in an high-tech rehabilitation, with a control group, that will receive the traditional rehabilitative treatment.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of a novel rehabilitation protocol integrating advanced technologies in the treatment of acute neuromuscular diseases (NMDs).
Background: NMDs affect muscle function and are directly controlled by the nervous system. Traditional rehabilitation often falls short in addressing the multifaceted needs of NMD patients. This gap underscores the necessity for innovative rehabilitation approaches that can significantly enhance the quality of life and optimize recovery outcomes following acute events.
Methods: The protocol integrates advanced technologies to address the rehabilitation needs of patients with acute NMDs. It utilizes robotic systems to ensure consistent and precise movement, virtual reality for immersive and engaging therapy, and stabilometric platforms to enhance balance training. The focus is on acute NMDs such as Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), Critical illness myopathy (CIM) and polyneuropathy (CIP), either individually or in combination (CIP/CIM). The approach emphasizes rapid rehabilitation to maximize recovery outcomes.
Study Design: An interventional, randomized, superiority case-control study with a parallel assignment. The trial aims to compare the efficacy of high-tech rehabilitation methods against conventional treatments in improving patient outcomes.
Outcome Measures: To assess the improvement at least 10 points in balance measured using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) from baseline to the end of the treatment period comparing the high-tech rehabilitation circuit with standard rehabilitation protocol.
Conclusion: This protocol seeks to determine if high-tech rehabilitation interventions can outperform traditional methods in acute NMDs. By doing so, it aims to potentially establish a new global standard for the care of patients with NMD care.
96 studies on the registry are indexed under Guillain-Barre Syndrome; 28 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 124 is above the median of 50 across 43 interventional studies indexed under Guillain-Barre Syndrome.
Browse Guillain-Barre Syndrome studies →Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri SpA is the lead sponsor of 126 studies on the registry; 51 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
The New York Heart Association’s four classes of how much heart failure limits physical activity.
Studies set their own limit — many outside heart failure leave out class III–IV, while heart failure studies may ask for a particular class. Check the class this study names.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
NYHA class (heart failure)
The New York Heart Association’s four classes of how much heart failure limits physical activity.
Studies set their own limit — many outside heart failure leave out class III–IV, while heart failure studies may ask for a particular class. Check the class this study names.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
In this arm, patients will be divided into 3 treatment types based on their Berg Balance Scale (BBS) score at the time of randomization. Phase 1 (BBS \<= 20) involves treatment with a robotic verticalization system (ERIGO) and action observation training with a virtual reality device. Phase 2 (21 \< BBS \< 40) involves treatment with a robotic verticalization system (ERIGO), action observation training with a virtual reality device, and proprioceptive exercises on robotic platforms (e.g. GEA MASTER or PROKIN Technobody). Phase 3 (BBS \>= 41) involves motor and cognitive exercises using virtual reality device, proprioceptive exercises on robotic platforms (e.g. GEA MASTER or PROKIN Technobody), and aerobic exercises on a robotic treadmill (e.g. Walkerview Technobody).
Device: High-tech rehabilitative treatment
The patients will receive the traditional rehabilitative treatment according to the good clinical practice according to the Diagnostic, Therapeutic and Care Pathways of each center involved
Other: Rehabilitation
Robotic Verticalization System (e.g., Erigo): Assists in regaining upright posture and mobility. Virtual Reality (e.g., VRRS Evo): Provides an engaging and immersive environment for cognitive and motor exercises. Stabilometric Platform (e.g., Gea Master or Prokin Technobody): Used for balance and postural control training. Treadmill System (e.g., Walkerview Technobody): Used for aerobic exercises with gait analysis and feedback
Traditional rehabilitative treatment
Change from baseline in Berg Balance Scale
Improvement in balance measured by the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), with a target improvement of at least 10 points from baseline to the end of the treatment period. BBS is used to objectively determine a patient's ability (or inability) to safely balance during a series of 14 tasks; each task ranks from 0 to 4, with a total score of 56. Higher score indicates the higher level of function.
Time frame: At the end of treatment at day 60
Change from baseline in Modified Barthel Index
Modified Barthel Index (MBI). The MBI is an adaptation of the original Barthel Index, designed to assess a patient's ability to perform activities of daily living (ADLs) and their level of independence. The MBI evaluates ten specific functions: Feeding, Bathing, Grooming, Dressing, Bowel control, Bladder control, Toileting, Transfers (e.g., bed to chair), Mobility (e.g., walking or wheelchair use), Stair climbing. Each item is scored on a 5-level ordinal scale. Interpretation: 0-20, Total dependency; 21-60, Severe dependency; 61-90, Moderate dependency; 91-99, Slight dependency; 100, Independence
Time frame: At day 15, at day 30, at day 45, at day 60
Change from baseline in Trunk Control Test
Trunk Control Test (TCT) for non-ambulatory patients. The TCT is a clinical assessment tool used to evaluate trunk movement control in patients, particularly those who have suffered a stroke or other neurological disorders. The TCT measures four specific movements: 1) Rolling to the weak side: The patient rolls from a supine position to their weaker side; 2) Rolling to the strong side: The patient rolls from a supine position to their stronger side; 3) Balance in a sitting position: The patient sits on the edge of a bed or table without support for at least 30 seconds; 4) Sitting up from lying down: The patient moves from a lying to a sitting position. Each movement is scored on a scale from 0 to 25, with a total possible score of 100. Higher scores indicate better trunk control (Collin \& Wade 1990)
Time frame: At day 15, at day 30, at day 45, at day 60
Change from baseline in 2-Minute Walk Test
2-Minute Walk Test (2MWT) for ambulatory patients. The Two-Minute Walk Test (2MWT) is a simple and quick assessment used to measure a person's walking endurance and functional mobility. It is based on the measurement of the distance that a person can walk in two minutes. The individual is instructed to walk as far as possible in two minutes, typically along a marked course. Assistive devices can be used if needed, but should be kept consistent across tests. The total distance walked in meters or feet is recorded
Time frame: At day 15, at day 30, at day 45, at day 60
Change from baseline in Modified Erasmus GBS Outcome Score
Modified Erasmus GBS Outcome Score (mEGOS) for Guillain-Barrè Syndrome patients: is a clinical prediction model used to estimate the likelihood of a patient with GBS being unable to walk independently six months after disease onset. This score is calculated based on three key factors: 1) Age at onset of neurological symptoms; 2) Preceding diarrhea before the onset of symptoms; 3) Severity of muscle weakness, assessed using the Medical Research Council sum score. The mEGOS provides a score ranging from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating a higher risk of walking inability
Time frame: At the end of treatment at day 60
Change from baseline in Handgrip strenght test
Maximal isometric handgrip strength for both right and left hands will be measured using a digital handgrip dynamometer in units of kg/f in the standardized position recommended by the American Society of Hand Therapists, that is, sitting in a chair with a 90° backrest and 90° elbow flexion of the hand to be evaluated. Each participant exerted three trials of 3 s of maximal isometric handgrip strength alternatively for the right and left hands, with a rest period of 180 s between trials and considering the best performance of the three trials for statistical analysis
Time frame: At day 15, at day 30, at day 45, at day 60
Change from baseline in Isometric muscles strenght
Isometric muscle strength, measured in kg, was assessed using a manual hand-held dynamometer (HHD) at the deltoid, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, wrist flexor, and wrist extensor for the upper limbs bilaterally; thigh flexor, knee extension, knee flexion, dorsiflexion, and plantarflexion for the lower limbs bilaterally
Time frame: At day 15, at day 30, at day 45, at day 60
Change from baseline in Numeric Rating Scale
Measured using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The NRS for fatigue is a simple and widely used tool to assess the intensity of fatigue. It helps patients communicate their fatigue levels to healthcare providers effectively. The NRS typically uses an 11-point scale ranging from 0 (no fatigue) to 10 ("the worst fatigue imaginable"). Patients are asked to rate their fatigue by selecting a number that best represents their pain intensity at that moment.
Time frame: At day 30 and day 60
Change from baseline in 12-Short Form-12 Survey
It will be used the 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12). The SF-12 is a self-reported questionnaire designed to measure health-related quality of life. It is a shortened version of the SF-36, created to reduce the burden on respondents while still providing reliable and valid results. The SF-12 covers eight health domains: Physical functioning; Role-physical (limitations due to physical health problems); Bodily pain; General health; Vitality (energy and fatigue); Social functioning; Role-emotional (limitations due to emotional problems); Mental health (psychological distress and well-being). The survey produces two summary scores: Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS). These scores are norm-based, with a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10. Scores above 50 indicate better-than-average health-related quality of life, while scores below 50 suggest below-average health
Time frame: At day 30 and day 60
Change from baseline in Technology Assisted Rehabilitation Patient Perception Questionnaire
To assess the patient perception of the technology assisted rehabilitation using the Technology Assisted Rehabilitation Patient Perception Questionnaire (TARPP-Q). The TARPP-Q consists of 10 questions with multiple choice answers, totalling 29 items. The Questionnaire assesses patients' personal experiences and perceptions of technology assisted rehabilitation, including aspects like usability, positive attitude, hindrance perception, and distress.
Time frame: At day 30, at day 60
Change from baseline in Insulin Growth Factor 1 and free Insulin Growth Factor 1
Will be measured these biomarkers in order to assess the levels changes during the treatment. Serum level will be measured in nanogram/milliliter
Time frame: At day 15, at day 30, at day 60
Change from baseline in Neurofilament-Light chain
Will be measured this biomarker in order to assess the levels changes during the treatment. Plasma level will be measured in picogram/milliliter.
Time frame: At day 15, at day 30, at day 60
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Started May 2025 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for May 2027, 24 months after the start.
Since we started tracking on Sep 25, 2026, the dates moved once, on Nov 4, 2026: primary completion Oct 2026 → May 2027 and completion Nov 2026 → Jun 2027.
Earlier changes are on the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri SpA →