Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
Effect of sensory-amplitude electric stimulation on motor recovery and gait kinematics after stroke: a randomized controlled study |
Yavuzer G, Oken O, Atay MB, Stam HJ |
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2007 Jun;88(6):710-714 |
clinical trial |
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed* |
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of sensory-amplitude electric stimulation (SES) of the paretic leg on motor recovery and gait kinematics of patients with stroke. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, double-blind study. SETTING: Rehabilitation ward and gait laboratory of a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 30 consecutive inpatients with stroke (mean age 63.2y), all within 6 months poststroke and without volitional ankle dorsiflexion were studied. INTERVENTION: Both the SES group (n = 15) and the placebo group (n = 15) participated in a conventional stroke rehabilitation program 5 days a week for 4 weeks. The SES group also received 30 minutes of SES to the paretic leg without muscle contraction 5 days a week for 4 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Brunnstrom stages of motor recovery and time-distance and kinematic characteristics of gait. RESULTS: Brunnstrom stages improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.05). In total, 58% of the SES group and 56% of the placebo group gained voluntary ankle dorsiflexion. The between-group difference of percentage change was not significant (p > 0.05). Gait kinematics was improved in both groups, but the between-group difference was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: In our patients with stroke, SES of the paretic leg was not superior to placebo in terms of lower-extremity motor recovery and gait kinematics.
|