Fastest
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/gait-training-robots-and-body-weight-support-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Rehabilitation & Assistive TechnologyGait Training Robots and Body Weight Support Patents
- A leader with 17 families sits well ahead of a field where fifth place holds 11 and tenth place holds just 6 — concentration at the top with a long tail behind it.
- Filing peaked in 2020 at 21 records and has fallen since, including a full drop-off in the latest year for several previously active filers — consistent with publication lag rather than a real stop in R&D.
- A61H (physical therapy) covers 73.5% of the 102 records and A63B (sports/gymnastics equipment) covers 35.3% — manipulator and robotics classifications (B25J) sit at just 8.8%, well below the mechanical-therapy core.
102
Published Records
US
Leading Jurisdiction
21
Active Filers Ranked
2020
Peak Filing Year
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks 102 published records matching gait training robot and body weight support terminology, cross-referenced against treadmill synchronization, pelvis motion, unloading force, step trajectory, spasticity handling and session duration concepts. The scope spans filings from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, with the assignee ranking drawn from the full set of 102 patent families rather than a sampled subset.
Filing activity concentrates in physical therapy and sports-equipment classifications rather than pure robotics codes, which tells you where the claim density actually sits: mechanical and therapeutic apparatus, not manipulator kinematics. Publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent year in any trend understates real activity.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2017-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Numbers
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 102-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and how those records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings ran from 16 in 2017 to a peak of 21 in 2020, then declined toward 1 in 2026 — a partial year given the data cut-off and the typical 18-month gap between filing and publication. Treat the 2024-2026 tail as under-counted rather than as a genuine slowdown.
IPC subclass composition
A61H (physical therapy & massage) appears in 73.5% of the 102 records, far ahead of A63B (sports & gymnastics equipment) at 35.3% and A61G (patient transport & care) at 17.6%. Because records can carry multiple IPC codes, these shares sum to more than 100% of the record total — that overlap is itself informative, showing how often gait-training claims are drafted across therapy and mechanical-equipment codes simultaneously.
Shares are the percentage of the 102 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about gait training robots and body weight support and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Most-cited records in this dataset
Representative Filing
US20220339778A1 — Body weight support system for exoskeletons and method of using the same
MAWASHI SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY INC.
A body weight support system configured to be worn by a user is provided. The support system comprises a leg support system and optionally a sacral support system, and a passive actuation system, in order to partially support and transfer the user's body weight down to the ground surface. The system connects to a load-bearing structure worn by the user, such as an exoskeleton, for at least partially supporting and transferring the body weight normally carried by the user, reducing the load effectively supported by the user while providing passive assistance to hip movement.Filed by Mawashi Science & Technology Inc., published 2022-10-27.
Highest-citation records
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20170128769A1 | Pressure chamber and lift for differential air pressure system with medical data collection capabilities | 230 |
| 2 | US7883450B2 | Body weight support system and method of using the same | 136 |
| 3 | US20080287268A1 | Body Weight Support System and Method of Using the Same | 115 |
| 4 | US10369021B2 | Powered orthotic system for cooperative overground rehabilitation | 94 |
| 5 | US20070270723A1 | Pelvis Interface | 38 |
| 6 | WO2018033591A2 | Apparatus comprising a support system for a user and its operation in a gravity-assist mode | 35 |
| 7 | US20160030201A1 | Powered Orthotic System for Cooperative Overground Rehabilitation | 34 |
| 8 | US20200384309A1 | Pressure chamber and lift for differential air pressure system with medical data collection capabilities | 26 |
| 9 | US20170326407A1 | Device with reciprocating upper extremity support assemblies | 26 |
| 10 | WO2015195983A1 | Pressure chamber and lift for differential air pressure system with medical data collection capabilities | 25 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and favour older filings; use them as a signal of influence on the field, not as a measure of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →Insights
What the data indicates
Reading the filing trend, the IPC composition and the citation table together points to a field where the therapeutic and mechanical layers are heavily claimed while the robotics-control layer is comparatively open.
Filing pattern
Peak 21 in 2020
records in peak year
Activity crested in 2020 and has tapered since
The trend runs from 16 records in 2017 up to 21 in 2020, then down toward single digits by 2026. Given the usual 18-month lag between filing and publication, the 2024-2026 figures are the least reliable and likely understate actual filing.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Class overlap
73.5% A61H, 35.3% A63B
share of 102 records
Therapy and equipment codes dominate over pure robotics
A61H and A63B together cover most of the corpus, while B25J (manipulators & robots) appears in only 8.8% of records. That gap suggests claim drafting has focused on the therapeutic apparatus and mechanical structure rather than the underlying robotic control architecture.
IPC subclass composition
Citation concentration
230 citations
top-cited record
A small number of early filings anchor the citation graph
The most-cited record, US20170128769A1, carries 230 citations — well ahead of the rest of the table. Older records naturally accumulate more citations inside a searched corpus, so this reflects historical influence on later filings rather than present-day relevance.
Most-cited records
Collaboration
5 co-assignee pairs
identified in this dataset
Collaborative filing exists but is limited to a handful of pairings
Five co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest pairing linked at 12 shared records. Most assignees in the ranking file independently, which narrows the number of joint-development signals available from this evidence alone.
Co-assignee pairs
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to gait training robots and body weight support, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and how the field is arranged
The ranking covers 21 companies counted in records — the full set the data endpoint returns for this scope, not a top-50 or top-100 cut. A single leader holds 17 records, with a clear drop to fifth place at 11 and tenth place at 6, indicating a small group of consistent filers ahead of a longer tail of single- or few-filing entrants.
Leader
17 records
leading assignee
One filer sits clearly ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 17 records in this scope, well above the fifth-place figure of 11 and the tenth-place figure of 6. That gap marks a genuine leader rather than a near-tie at the top.
Assignee ranking
Mid-tier
11 records
fifth place
A compact group of established filers follows the leader
Fifth place holds 11 records, meaning several assignees maintain a meaningful filing history without approaching the leader's volume. This tier is where sustained R&D programs, rather than one-off filings, are most likely concentrated.
Assignee ranking
Long tail
6 records
tenth place
The tail thins quickly past the top ten
Tenth place drops to 6 records, and the ranking includes 21 companies in total, so a substantial share of named assignees are filing in small numbers. This is typical of a field with academic, hospital and government participants alongside commercial developers.
Assignee ranking
Recent momentum
0 in latest year
for several leading assignees
Latest-year activity has gone quiet across top filers
Several of the most active assignees, including the leading government and foundation filers, show zero records in the latest year with year-over-year drops of -100%. Given publication lag, this is more likely a reporting artifact than a genuine halt in development.
Recent-year momentum
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Ekso Bionics Inc. | 0 | — |
| Healing Innovations Inc. | 0 | — |
| United States of America as represented by the Dept of Veterans Affairs | 0 | -100% |
| AlterG Inc. | 0 | — |
| Kessler Foundation | 0 | -100% |
| Tan Tock Seng Hospital Pte Ltd | 0 | — |
| Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL) | 0 | — |
| Nanyang Technological University | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this next
The dataset points to a field with a settled therapeutic-apparatus core and a comparatively open robotics-control layer. The next step is usually narrowing to a specific claim area before drafting.
Map the control-layer white space
With B25J classifications covering under 9% of records, a deeper search into manipulator and control-architecture claims specifically for gait training could surface less-crowded filing territory.
Explore in EurekaTrack the leading assignees' next moves
The top filers show a drop to zero in the latest year, which publication lag makes hard to interpret from raw counts alone. Monitoring their filing pipelines directly is the more reliable signal.
Set up monitoring in EurekaReview the most-cited prior art before drafting
The highest-cited records anchor much of the surrounding claim language. Reviewing them in detail before drafting new claims reduces the risk of overlapping an already well-established filing.
Review key patents in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this landscape
This dataset identifies 102 published records matching gait training robot and body weight support terminology within the specified scope, covering filings from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off. The assignee ranking is built from the same 102 patent families, so it reflects the full scope rather than a sample. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the true number of filings in the most recent one to two years is likely higher than currently visible.
The ranking covers 21 companies, with a clear leader holding 17 records and a fifth-place assignee holding 11. The field includes commercial device makers alongside academic institutions, hospitals and at least one government body, reflecting the mix of clinical research and product development typical of rehabilitation technology. Rather than naming a fixed top list, it is more useful to look at the gap between the leader and the rest, which signals a concentrated but not monopolised space.
A61H, covering physical therapy and massage apparatus, appears in 73.5% of the 102 records and is the dominant classification. A63B, covering sports and gymnastics equipment, follows at 35.3%, with A61G (patient transport and care) at 17.6%. Robotics-specific classification B25J appears in only 8.8% of records, indicating that most claims are drafted around the therapeutic and mechanical apparatus rather than the underlying robotic control system.
Filing rose from 16 records in 2017 to a peak of 21 in 2020, then declined toward the most recent partial year. This decline should not be read as a genuine slowdown in research, because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, meaning 2024-2026 figures are the least complete in the dataset. A clearer growth or decline rate cannot be computed until more of the recent years are fully published.
US20220339778A1, filed by Mawashi Science & Technology Inc. and published 2022-10-27, describes a body weight support system worn by the user, comprising a leg support system, an optional sacral support, and a passive actuation system that transfers body weight to the ground surface, typically in combination with an exoskeleton. It matters because it targets passive hip-assistance mechanics rather than active motor-driven actuation, occupying a specific mechanical design space distinct from powered exoskeleton claims. Anyone designing a similar passive body-weight-transfer mechanism should review its claim scope directly before finalizing a design.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Gait Training Robots and Body Weight Support in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole gait training robots and body weight support corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company's registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.