Cargando…

Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review

BACKGROUND: Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) is a non-invasive modality in which electrodes can stimulate spinal circuitries and facilitate a motor response. This review aimed to evaluate the methodology of studies using tSCS to generate motor activity in persons with spinal cord injury...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Taylor, Clare, McHugh, Conor, Mockler, David, Minogue, Conor, Reilly, Richard B., Fleming, Neil
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8601579/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34793572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260166
_version_ 1784601386354212864
author Taylor, Clare
McHugh, Conor
Mockler, David
Minogue, Conor
Reilly, Richard B.
Fleming, Neil
author_facet Taylor, Clare
McHugh, Conor
Mockler, David
Minogue, Conor
Reilly, Richard B.
Fleming, Neil
author_sort Taylor, Clare
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) is a non-invasive modality in which electrodes can stimulate spinal circuitries and facilitate a motor response. This review aimed to evaluate the methodology of studies using tSCS to generate motor activity in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) and to appraise the quality of included trials. METHODS: A systematic search for studies published until May 2021 was made of the following databases: EMBASE, Medline (Ovid) and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and evaluated the quality of included trials. The electrical characteristics of stimulation were summarised to allow for comparison across studies. In addition, the surface electromyography (EMG) recording methods were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 3753 articles were initially screened, of which 25 met the criteria for inclusion. Studies were divided into those using tSCS for neurophysiological investigations of reflex responses (n = 9) and therapeutic investigations of motor recovery (n = 16). The overall quality of evidence was deemed to be poor-to-fair (10.5 ± 4.9) based on the Downs and Black Quality Checklist criteria. The electrical characteristics were collated to establish the dosage range across stimulation trials. The methods employed by included studies relating to stimulation parameters and outcome measurement varied extensively, although some trends are beginning to appear in relation to electrode configuration and EMG outcomes. CONCLUSION: This review outlines the parameters currently employed for tSCS of the cervicothoracic and thoracolumbar regions to produce motor responses. However, to establish standardised procedures for neurophysiological assessments and therapeutic investigations of tSCS, further high-quality investigations are required, ideally utilizing consistent electrophysiological recording methods, and reporting common characteristics of the electrical stimulation administered.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8601579
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86015792021-11-19 Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review Taylor, Clare McHugh, Conor Mockler, David Minogue, Conor Reilly, Richard B. Fleming, Neil PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) is a non-invasive modality in which electrodes can stimulate spinal circuitries and facilitate a motor response. This review aimed to evaluate the methodology of studies using tSCS to generate motor activity in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) and to appraise the quality of included trials. METHODS: A systematic search for studies published until May 2021 was made of the following databases: EMBASE, Medline (Ovid) and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and evaluated the quality of included trials. The electrical characteristics of stimulation were summarised to allow for comparison across studies. In addition, the surface electromyography (EMG) recording methods were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 3753 articles were initially screened, of which 25 met the criteria for inclusion. Studies were divided into those using tSCS for neurophysiological investigations of reflex responses (n = 9) and therapeutic investigations of motor recovery (n = 16). The overall quality of evidence was deemed to be poor-to-fair (10.5 ± 4.9) based on the Downs and Black Quality Checklist criteria. The electrical characteristics were collated to establish the dosage range across stimulation trials. The methods employed by included studies relating to stimulation parameters and outcome measurement varied extensively, although some trends are beginning to appear in relation to electrode configuration and EMG outcomes. CONCLUSION: This review outlines the parameters currently employed for tSCS of the cervicothoracic and thoracolumbar regions to produce motor responses. However, to establish standardised procedures for neurophysiological assessments and therapeutic investigations of tSCS, further high-quality investigations are required, ideally utilizing consistent electrophysiological recording methods, and reporting common characteristics of the electrical stimulation administered. Public Library of Science 2021-11-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8601579/ /pubmed/34793572 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260166 Text en © 2021 Taylor et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Taylor, Clare
McHugh, Conor
Mockler, David
Minogue, Conor
Reilly, Richard B.
Fleming, Neil
Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review
title Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review
title_full Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review
title_fullStr Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review
title_full_unstemmed Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review
title_short Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review
title_sort transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: a methodological review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8601579/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34793572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260166
work_keys_str_mv AT taylorclare transcutaneousspinalcordstimulationandmotorresponsesinindividualswithspinalcordinjuryamethodologicalreview
AT mchughconor transcutaneousspinalcordstimulationandmotorresponsesinindividualswithspinalcordinjuryamethodologicalreview
AT mocklerdavid transcutaneousspinalcordstimulationandmotorresponsesinindividualswithspinalcordinjuryamethodologicalreview
AT minogueconor transcutaneousspinalcordstimulationandmotorresponsesinindividualswithspinalcordinjuryamethodologicalreview
AT reillyrichardb transcutaneousspinalcordstimulationandmotorresponsesinindividualswithspinalcordinjuryamethodologicalreview
AT flemingneil transcutaneousspinalcordstimulationandmotorresponsesinindividualswithspinalcordinjuryamethodologicalreview