Technology landscape · Assistive robotics · 2000–2023

Two thirds of the assistive robotics patent families date from 2018 or later.

9,450 patent families in ten CPC places that name assistance, rehabilitation or nursing. Since 2018 most of them include a Chinese filing.

Data
EPO PATSTAT Global, Spring 2026 (patstat_2026a)
Unit
DOCDB family
Scope
Ten CPC codes in four robotic concepts
Queries
0–9b, all published
Families by filing office · rows from front to back: 2000–2011, 2012–2017, 2018–2023Query 4
  1. 6,059

    of the 9,450 families have an earliest filing year of 2018 or later.

    Growth
  2. 17.8%

    a year: the series compounds from 200 families (2012) to 1,029 (2022).

    Growth
  3. 4,254

    families are exoskeletons, the largest of the four concepts and the one that grew hardest.

    Technology
  4. 67.6%

    of the families first filed in 2018–2023 include a Chinese filing, against 10.6% in 2000–2011.

    Where
  5. 2.6%

    of the set is held by the largest portfolio, Samsung Electronics with 242 families.

    Applicants

01 · Growth

Filings grew 17.8% a year from 2012 to 2022

2000–2015

Annual filings grew from 30 families in 2000 to 271 in 2015. 917 families have an earliest filing year in 2000–2011.

2016

From 271 families to 722, an increase of 166% in one year. It falls in the period in which China became the largest filing cohort, but this data does not establish a cause. Read it as a break in the series.

2018–2023

6,059 of 9,450 families have an earliest filing year of 2018 or later. The peak is 1,080 in 2021, with 944 in 2023.

Lower international share

Families filed at two or more authorities: 40.2% for 2000–2011 (369 of 917), 33.8% for 2012–2017 (835 of 2,474), 21.0% for 2018–2023 (1,275 of 6,059).

Patent families by earliest filing year, all and filed at two or more authorities

Data table: filing trend 2000–2023
Families by earliest filing year
YearPatent familiesFiled at 2+ authoritiesInternational share
2000301136.7%
2001341029.4%
2002392051.3%
2003451942.2%
2004522140.4%
2005612541.0%
2006733041.1%
2007883539.8%
20081145850.9%
20091085248.1%
20101234435.8%
20111504429.3%
20122006231.0%
201321510147.0%
201420611555.8%
201527115055.4%
201672219727.3%
201786021024.4%
201892722424.2%
20191,00427427.3%
20201,07521720.2%
20211,08020719.2%
20221,02919819.2%
202394415516.4%
Total9,4502,47926.2%

Query 3Each family counted once, in its earliest filing year

Across the whole window 2,479 families (26.2%) reach two or more authorities and 1,790 (18.9%) include a WO application. Filings up to 2023 are substantially complete at this edition, but the last years of any window still fill up slightly, so no growth statement here rests on 2023 alone.

02 · Technology

Exoskeletons are the largest concept and grew the hardest

The ten defining codes group into four concepts. The grouping follows what the code titles describe, and the concepts overlap: a powered gait trainer can be both an exoskeleton and a rehabilitation robot. Exoskeletons hold 4,254 families (45.0%), with 255 in 2000–2011 and 2,911 in 2018–2023. Walking and gait aids were the largest concept in the early period (574) and grew slowest since, to 1,115. Nursing robots stay the smallest strand (956).

Patent families per robotic concept and period

Data table: families per concept and period
Patent families per concept and period
Concept2000–20112012–20172018–2023Total familiesShare of 9,450
Exoskeletons2551,0882,9114,25445.0%
Rehabilitation and therapy robots1867652,1143,06532.4%
Robotic walking and gait aids5746781,1152,36725.0%
Personal assistance and nursing robots4631559595610.1%
Distinct families9172,4746,0599,450100%

Query 3Concepts overlap; do not add them up

Concepts are not mutually exclusive. The four concept totals sum to 10,642 against 9,450 distinct families, an overlap of 1,192 concept memberships. Concept figures must not be added together.

Families per defining CPC code (codes with 250 families or more)

CPC codeTitleConceptFamilies
B25J9/0006Exoskeletons, i.e. resembling a human figureExoskeletons4,225
A61H1/0262Walking movement; appliances for aiding disabled persons to walkRehabilitation and therapy robots1,767
A61H3/008Walking aids using suspension devices supporting the body uprightRobotic walking and gait aids1,496
A61H2201/1659Free spatial automatic movement of the therapy interface within a working areaRehabilitation and therapy robots1,485
A61H2003/043Wheeled walking aid with a drive mechanismRobotic walking and gait aids973
B25J11/009Manipulators for nursing, e.g. carrying sick persons, pushing wheelchairsPersonal assistance and nursing robots775

Query 7The four G05B2219 robotics tags each hold fewer than 250 families

8,796 of 9,450 families (93.1%) carry at least one CPC code beyond the ten that define the scope. The set sits across two subclasses: A61H (physical therapy apparatus, 5,925) and B25J (manipulators, 5,377), a medical-device tradition and a robotics tradition meeting on the same devices. Device fields such as A63B (1,037), A61B (832), A61F (762) and A61G (717) all outweigh G16H (304) and G06F (297).

Other CPC subclasses the same families carry

Data table: co-occurring CPC subclasses
Co-occurring CPC subclasses
SubclassDescriptionFamiliesof which 2018–2023Share of 9,450
A61HPhysical therapy apparatus5,9253,55962.7%
B25JManipulators5,3773,61556.9%
A63BPhysical training, gymnastics1,03753311.0%
A61BDiagnosis; surgery; identification8325048.8%
A61FProstheses; orthopaedic devices7623688.1%
A61GTransport and personal conveyances for patients7174457.6%
G05BControl or regulating systems in general4202404.4%
G16HHealthcare informatics3042313.2%
G06FElectric digital data processing2972233.1%
Y02AAdaptation to climate change2532332.7%

Query 7A family appears in several subclasses; totals exceed 9,450

Subclass totals exceed the family total: one family carries several CPC symbols, so the ten figures are counts per subclass, not parts of a whole. 253 families carry a Y02A tag (adaptation to climate change, including health adaptation). Y tags have no IPC equivalent, so counts based on them under-represent offices that do not assign CPC.

03 · Where

China appears in 4,096 of the 6,059 recent families

Over the whole window 5,444 families (57.6%) include a Chinese filing, ahead of the United States (2,555, 27.0%) and Korea (2,219, 23.5%). The order is recent. In 2000–2011 the United States appeared in 442 of 917 families (48.2%) and China in 97 (10.6%). In 2018–2023 China appears in 67.6% and the United States in 1,266 (20.9%). Japan is the only major office whose count falls between the last two periods, from 390 to 375.

Patent families with a filing at each office, by period

Data table: families by office and period
Patent families with a filing at each office, by period
Office2000–20112012–20172018–2023Total familiesShare of 9,450
CN China971,2514,0965,44457.6%
US United States4428471,2662,55527.0%
KR Korea3427351,1422,21923.5%
WO PCT2985709221,79018.9%
EP European Patent Office1944595591,21212.8%
JP Japan20439037596910.3%
DE Germany1171441844454.7%
CA Canada761201243203.4%
AU Australia5780802172.3%
FR France2955741581.7%
ES Spain3569491531.6%
IT Italy84051991.0%
Distinct families9172,4746,0599,450100%

Query 4A family counts at every office where it has a member

Office totals exceed the family total: a family filed in China, the United States and at the EPO counts at each office, so the columns sum above 9,450 and above the period totals. WO counts families with a PCT application, which is a route rather than a market.

Applicant origin is not shown. 5,792 of the 9,343 families with an applicant record (62%) carry a blank country code on every applicant, and Chinese applicants are coded for only 275 families against 5,444 with a Chinese filing. An origin chart would describe the coding, not the field. Filing authority answers a different question: in which markets the field seeks protection.

04 · Applicants

No applicant holds more than 242 families

Samsung Electronics holds the largest portfolio, 2.6% of the set. The fifteen largest portfolios together account for at most 1,307 of 9,450 families, under 14%, before removing jointly filed families. Honda Motor is the only leader concentrated in the early period, with 86 of its 112 families first filed before 2012. Samsung (156 of 242), LG Electronics (75 of 90), the Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology (61 of 66) and four Chinese universities have most of their families in 2018–2023.

Fifteen largest consolidated portfolios, patent families 2000–2023

  1. 01Samsung Electronics Company242
  2. 02Hyundai Motor Group Company139
  3. 03Toyota Motor Company119
  4. 04Honda Motor Company112
  5. 05LG Electronics Company90
  6. 06National Rehabilitation Center Public research70
  7. 07KAIST University68
  8. 08Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, CAS Public research66
  9. 09Hebei University of Technology University66
  10. 10Panasonic Company60
  11. 11Hefei University of Technology University60
  12. 12Harbin Institute of Technology University58
  13. 13Agency for Defense Development Public research56
  14. 14Hangzhou Chengtian Technology Development Company52
  15. 15JTEKT Company49
Data table: portfolios by period and name variants
Fifteen largest consolidated portfolios
Applicant groupSectorCountry (PATSTAT-coded)Name variants2000–20112012–20172018–2023Families
Samsung ElectronicsCompanyKR111175156242
Hyundai Motor GroupCompanyKR15106366139
Toyota MotorCompanyJP1883774119
Honda MotorCompanyJP8861115112
LG ElectronicsCompanyKR3697590
National Rehabilitation CenterPublic researchKR13333470
KAISTUniversityKR18223868
Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, CASPublic researchCN4056166
Hebei University of TechnologyUniversity–10135366
PanasonicCompanyJP1914291760
Hefei University of TechnologyUniversity–10134760
Harbin Institute of TechnologyUniversity–10213758
Agency for Defense DevelopmentPublic researchKR10272956
Hangzhou Chengtian Technology DevelopmentCompany–1044852
JTEKTCompanyJP4084149

Query 6Name variants grouped per organisation; each family counted once per group

Counts are lower bounds. PATSTAT's harmonised name splits organisations across variants: Toyota appears under 18, Panasonic under 19, the Hyundai group under 15 and Samsung under 11. Variants that resolve to the same organisation, including those in Japanese and Chinese script, are grouped; variants no rule catches stay separate. The country column shows only what PATSTAT codes and is not inferred from the name.

9,343 of the 9,450 families carry an applicant record. Universities appear on 2,815 families, public research bodies on 576 and organisations coded as both on 147, against 3,979 with a company applicant. 1,938 of the 2,815 university families were first filed in 2018–2023. 1,595 families carry an individual applicant, which points to a low barrier to entry for mechanical assistive devices. 1,319 families (14.1% of those with an applicant record) include an application with more than one applicant.

Families per applicant sector (PATSTAT psn_sector)

PATSTAT sectorFamiliesShare of 9,343
COMPANY3,97942.6%
UNIVERSITY2,81530.1%
INDIVIDUAL1,59517.1%
UNKNOWN1,39915.0%
GOV NON-PROFIT5766.2%
GOV NON-PROFIT UNIVERSITY1471.6%
HOSPITAL1331.4%
(not stated)740.8%

Query 5Sectors are not exclusive; the column sums to 10,718 against 9,343 families

05 · Grants

69.3% of the applications from the 2000–2018 cohort were granted, China 60.6%

For applications in families first filed 2000–2018, 5,927 of 8,547 were granted, PCT applications excluded. Korea (79.8%) and the United States (78.1%) lead; China (60.6%) and Germany (44.8%) trail. China has the largest volume and the lowest rate among the major offices: 1,275 grants from 2,103 applications. Because Chinese filings dominate recent years, this also pulls the overall rate down over time. At family level, 3,097 of 4,318 families (71.7%) have at least one granted member.

Grant rate by office, applications from families first filed 2000–2018 (%)

Data table: grant outcomes by office
Grant outcomes by office, families first filed 2000–2018
OfficeApplicationsGrantedGrant rate
KR Korea1,3081,04479.8%
US United States1,9601,53078.1%
JP Japan74756175.1%
EP European Patent Office85958668.2%
CN China2,1031,27560.6%
AU Australia1609458.8%
CA Canada22212154.5%
DE Germany31514144.8%
ES Spain123123100.0%
WO PCT (excluded)1,034323.1%
All offices excl. WO8,5475,92769.3%

Spain's 100% reflects a national procedure in which the counted applications all issued; with 123 applications it is not comparable to the large offices.

Query 4PCT applications excluded

Pendency: granted means granted as of this snapshot. 83.4% of families first filed in 2015 have a granted member, against 48.3% for 2022 and 29.4% for 2023. Every rate above is restricted to the 2000–2018 cohort for that reason. The series is not monotonic (2019 sits above 2020 and 2021), so pendency is not the only influence, and this data does not isolate the others. WO applications are not granted; including their 1,034 applications with 32 grants would depress the rate without meaning.

Share of families with a granted member, by earliest filing year

Earliest filing yearFamiliesWith a granted memberShare
201012310282.9%
201527122683.4%
20191,00467467.1%
20201,07567662.9%
20211,08063058.3%
20221,02949748.3%
202394427829.4%

Query 4Recent years measure examination speed as much as success

06 · How we counted

How the numbers were counted

  • One family, one countA DOCDB family enters the scope if any application carries one of the ten codes. It counts once, in its earliest filing year, so the annual column sums to 9,450. All its applications are then used for office, grant and applicant counts.
  • Ten CPC codes, CPC onlyThe ten places whose own text names assistance, rehabilitation or nursing. None exists in the IPC: the scheme bridge maps four to far broader parents and six to nothing.
  • Precision firstA fresh sample of 25 families from the final scope has four off-subject titles, a residual noise rate of 16%, inside the one-in-five limit.
  • Overlaps by designConcepts, offices, CPC subclasses and applicant sectors overlap, so their sub-totals exceed the headline figure and are never drawn as parts of a whole.
Checks and limits
  • EditionsUpdated 15 August 2026 against EPO PATSTAT Global, Spring 2026 (patstat-mtc.patstat_2026a), IPC edition 20260101, CPC edition 202608.
  • How the codes were foundThree entry points into the schemes: the WIPO catchword index, title breadcrumbs (title_full, singular and plural) and CPC definition texts. Every seed was expanded to its subtree via the parent relation, unioned with its predecessors and kept regardless of is_active. All ten turned out to be leaves with no predecessor and none deprecated, so the completed set equals the seed set.
  • Wider scope rejectedA candidate scope adding collaborative robotics, legged locomotion, embodied artificial life and home and service robots held 42,616 families. In a stratified title sample, twenty of twenty-four randomly drawn families were off-subject (neural-network hardware, power control, image analysis, cleaning and rescue robots).
  • Keyword layer outside the scopeA title search for exoskeleton, rehabilitation robot, walking assist, gait training, nursing robot, assistive robot and walking aid returns 14,219 families: 3,249 in the scope, 10,970 not. A sample of 25 of them holds robotic assistive devices classified elsewhere (hand and wrist rehabilitation trainers, gait-training leg supports, soft rehabilitation gloves) and passive walking aids excluded by design. Widening the code set to reach them destroyed precision. The 9,450 figure is a reproducible cut of the field, not a census.
  • Non-robotic devices excludedPlain orthopaedic braces (A61F5/01), passive exercise apparatus (A61H1/02) and unpowered wheeled walking aids (A61H3/04) hold 104,555 families in this window, a different subject.
  • Wheelchairs not countedPowered wheelchairs and patient-transport vehicles are outside the scope. A61G co-occurs on 717 families but is not a defining code.
  • CPC-only coverageOffices that do not assign CPC are under-represented; no IPC equivalent of the ten codes exists to compensate. Every count rests on tls224_appln_cpc.
  • ExclusionsPseudo-families (docdb_family_id = 0) and design applications (appln_kind D) are excluded. Applicants are taken with applt_seq_nr > 0; inventors are not analysed.
  • Applicant origin and names62% of families with an applicant record carry no country code; origin is not reported. Harmonised names split organisations, so applicant counts are lower bounds.
  • Grant ratesRestricted to the 2000–2018 cohort and without PCT applications; later filings are still under examination.
  • No external benchmarkThe family count has not been checked against a third-party database. It carries internal consistency only.

The scope block every analytical query repeats

Query 3queries.sql · Queries 0–9b in execution order, each annotated with its result

Release protocol

  1. Agentsearch + draftBuilt the search profile and queried PATSTAT read-only through the patstat-mcp server. Every number comes from SQL.
  2. Checks13 rulesEvery claim must trace back to a query; chart and table must agree.
  3. Reviewsubject expertChecks scope, counts and wording before publication.
  4. Approvalsecond personA second person not involved in the report approves publication.

Next step

Which technology or region should we count for you?

A report like this one starts at 1,500 € plus VAT. Or learn to build it yourself on the EPO's Technology Intelligence Platform.

Book a scoping call · Training for PATLIB centres