Assessing the relevance of biosignal-controlled robotic rehabilitation technologies: a systematic review

Technology is transforming rehabilitative medicine by enhancing accessibility and personalisation. Robot-assisted rehabilitation uses robotic systems for recovery from physical and neurological impairments, enabling intensive, repetitive training with real-time feedback. These systems aim to restore motor function and mobility and to increase independence in daily life, needs that are growing in light of population ageing. Rather than revisiting control algorithms or mechanical design, this review aims to investigate the combined use of bio-signals and robotic rehabilitation systems, and to discuss their potential in rehabilitation settings outside disease-specific clinical frameworks. We reviewed studies published from 2020 through early 2025 to capture recent advances in this rapidly evolving field. Our objective was to assess the relevance of these technologies to rehabilitation outcomes, such as improvements in motor function or other clinical metrics. We considered robot-assisted systems driven by biosignals such as electromyography (EMG), electroencephalography, or electrocardiography and included only studies reporting measurable rehabilitative outcomes. Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched Scopus, PubMed, and WoS databases. Of 207 records screened, 15 met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the included studies suggest that contemporary biosignal-controlled robotic rehabilitation, particularly EMG-driven approaches, may support more intensive, personalised, and engaging therapy than conventional care alone, although the current evidence remains preliminary. Preliminary findings indicate that, by closing the loop among patient, device, and therapist, these systems may reduce muscle activity and support improvements in motor performance; however, the evidence base remains heterogeneous and generally underpowered. To support future clinical adoption, the field needs adequately sized, head-to-head trials with standardised outcome measures, longer follow-up, and transparent reporting of adherence, adverse events, user experience, and implementation barriers, including training and cost. These steps will be important to further assess efficacy and evaluate usability in real-world settings.