Cargando…

Effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation (CCFES) vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for motor recovery of the lower extremity in patients with subacute stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy patients within 6 mon...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huang, Songhua, Zhang, Yuqian, Liu, Peile, Chen, Yinglun, Gao, Beiyao, Chen, Chan, Bai, Yulong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9773873/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36570446
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1010975
_version_ 1784855282368643072
author Huang, Songhua
Zhang, Yuqian
Liu, Peile
Chen, Yinglun
Gao, Beiyao
Chen, Chan
Bai, Yulong
author_facet Huang, Songhua
Zhang, Yuqian
Liu, Peile
Chen, Yinglun
Gao, Beiyao
Chen, Chan
Bai, Yulong
author_sort Huang, Songhua
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation (CCFES) vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for motor recovery of the lower extremity in patients with subacute stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy patients within 6 months post-stroke were randomly assigned to the CCFES group (n = 35) and the NMES group (n = 35). Both groups underwent routine rehabilitation plus 20-min electrical stimulation (CCFES or NMES) on ankle dorsiflexion muscles per day, 5 days a week, for 3 weeks. Ankle AROM (dorsiflexion), Fugl-Meyer assessment-lower extremity (FMA-LE), Barthel Index (BI), Functional Ambulation Category scale (FAC), 10-meter walking test, and surface electromyography (sEMG) were assessed at the baseline and at the end of the intervention. RESULT: Ten patients did not complete the study (five in CCFES and five in NMES), so only 60 patients were analyzed in the end. After the 3-week intervention, FMA-LE, BI, Ankle AROM (dorsiflexion), and FAC increased in both groups (p < 0.05). Patients in the CCFES group showed significantly greater improvements only in the measurement of Fugl-Meyer assessment-lower extremity compared with the NMES group after treatment (p < 0.05). The improvement in sEMG response of tibialis anterior by CCFES was greater than NMES (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Contralateral controlled functional electrical stimulation can effectively improve the motor function of the lower limbs better than conventional neuromuscular electrical stimulation in subacute patients after stroke, but the effect on improving the ability to walk, such as walking speed, was not good. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier: ChiCTR2100045423.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9773873
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97738732022-12-23 Effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized controlled trial Huang, Songhua Zhang, Yuqian Liu, Peile Chen, Yinglun Gao, Beiyao Chen, Chan Bai, Yulong Front Neurol Neurology OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation (CCFES) vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for motor recovery of the lower extremity in patients with subacute stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy patients within 6 months post-stroke were randomly assigned to the CCFES group (n = 35) and the NMES group (n = 35). Both groups underwent routine rehabilitation plus 20-min electrical stimulation (CCFES or NMES) on ankle dorsiflexion muscles per day, 5 days a week, for 3 weeks. Ankle AROM (dorsiflexion), Fugl-Meyer assessment-lower extremity (FMA-LE), Barthel Index (BI), Functional Ambulation Category scale (FAC), 10-meter walking test, and surface electromyography (sEMG) were assessed at the baseline and at the end of the intervention. RESULT: Ten patients did not complete the study (five in CCFES and five in NMES), so only 60 patients were analyzed in the end. After the 3-week intervention, FMA-LE, BI, Ankle AROM (dorsiflexion), and FAC increased in both groups (p < 0.05). Patients in the CCFES group showed significantly greater improvements only in the measurement of Fugl-Meyer assessment-lower extremity compared with the NMES group after treatment (p < 0.05). The improvement in sEMG response of tibialis anterior by CCFES was greater than NMES (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Contralateral controlled functional electrical stimulation can effectively improve the motor function of the lower limbs better than conventional neuromuscular electrical stimulation in subacute patients after stroke, but the effect on improving the ability to walk, such as walking speed, was not good. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier: ChiCTR2100045423. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-12-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9773873/ /pubmed/36570446 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1010975 Text en Copyright © 2022 Huang, Zhang, Liu, Chen, Gao, Chen and Bai. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neurology
Huang, Songhua
Zhang, Yuqian
Liu, Peile
Chen, Yinglun
Gao, Beiyao
Chen, Chan
Bai, Yulong
Effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized controlled trial
title Effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized controlled trial
title_full Effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized controlled trial
title_short Effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: A randomized controlled trial
title_sort effectiveness of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation vs. neuromuscular electrical stimulation for recovery of lower extremity function in patients with subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial
topic Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9773873/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36570446
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1010975
work_keys_str_mv AT huangsonghua effectivenessofcontralaterallycontrolledfunctionalelectricalstimulationvsneuromuscularelectricalstimulationforrecoveryoflowerextremityfunctioninpatientswithsubacutestrokearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT zhangyuqian effectivenessofcontralaterallycontrolledfunctionalelectricalstimulationvsneuromuscularelectricalstimulationforrecoveryoflowerextremityfunctioninpatientswithsubacutestrokearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT liupeile effectivenessofcontralaterallycontrolledfunctionalelectricalstimulationvsneuromuscularelectricalstimulationforrecoveryoflowerextremityfunctioninpatientswithsubacutestrokearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT chenyinglun effectivenessofcontralaterallycontrolledfunctionalelectricalstimulationvsneuromuscularelectricalstimulationforrecoveryoflowerextremityfunctioninpatientswithsubacutestrokearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT gaobeiyao effectivenessofcontralaterallycontrolledfunctionalelectricalstimulationvsneuromuscularelectricalstimulationforrecoveryoflowerextremityfunctioninpatientswithsubacutestrokearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT chenchan effectivenessofcontralaterallycontrolledfunctionalelectricalstimulationvsneuromuscularelectricalstimulationforrecoveryoflowerextremityfunctioninpatientswithsubacutestrokearandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT baiyulong effectivenessofcontralaterallycontrolledfunctionalelectricalstimulationvsneuromuscularelectricalstimulationforrecoveryoflowerextremityfunctioninpatientswithsubacutestrokearandomizedcontrolledtrial