[en] Background. The stroke or cerebrovascular accident is the second cause of death, first cause of disability and second cause of demetia. There are multiple types of stroke, but all of them lead to a large group of sequelae including a reduced walking ability that affects the functionality and independence of each individual. There are multiple therapeutic approaches to this last condition, including two of the most commonly used: conventional physical therapy and robotic assistance, which will be the key subjects of this review. Objetive. To determine which approach is more effective for gait training in post-stroke patients, robotic assistance or conventional physical therapy. Methods. A bibliographic review was conducted in the following data bases: Cochrane, Pubmed, PEDro, Scopus, Cinahl and Web of Science. All randomized clinical trials published on the last 5 years with two different study groups (robotic assistance and conventional physical therapy) were included. The variables were the quality of the evidence, the characteristics of the intervention, walking ability (speed, resistance, pattern and functionality), balance and quality of life and independence. Outcomes. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 9 randomized clinical trials were selected. Conclusions. Despite the high level of the evidence and the recommendation degree of the selected articles, a difference between the two treatments wasn't found. Both are effective and improve the patient's condition, but there were not significant differences between them.

[gl] Introdución. O ictus ou accidente cerebrovascular, é a segunda causa de morte, a primeira de discapacidade e a segunda de demencia. Existen distintos tipos de ictus, pero todos eles dan lugar a un gran grupo de secuelas, entre as que se encontran as alteracións da marcha, que repercuten sobre a funcionalidade e independencia de cada individuo. Existen múltiples abordaxes desta afección, entre elas, dos das máis utilizadas: a fisioterapia convencional e as asistencias robóticas, que serán o obxecto desta revisión. Obxectivo. Determinar que abordaxe é máis efectivo para a reeducación da marcha dos pacientes post-ictus, a asistencia robótica ou a fisioterapia convencional. Material e método. Realizase unha revisión bibliográfica das bases de datos Cochrane, Pubmed, PEDro, Scopus, Cinahl y Web of Science, nas que se han incluído ensaios clínicos aleatorizados (ECAs) publicados nos últimos 5 anos nos que hai dous grupos de estudio: un que recibe fisioterapia convencional e outro que recibe asistencia robótica. As variables de estudo foron a calidade da evidencia, as características da intervención, a marcha (velocidade, resistencia, patrón e funcionalidade), equilibrio e calidade de vida e independencia. Resultados. Según os criterios de inclusión e exclusión, seleccionáronse un total de 9 ensaios clínicos aleatorizados. Conclusións. A pesar do elevado nivel de evidencia e do grado de recomendación dos estudos seleccionados, non hai superioridade de ningún dos dous tratamentos por enriba doutro para a reeducación da marcha dos pacientes postictus. Ambos son efectivos e producen mellorías, pero non hai diferencias significativas entre ambos.