Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Randomized controlled trial of surface peroneal nerve stimulation for motor relearning in lower limb hemiparesis
Sheffler LR, Taylor PN, Gunzler DD, Buurke JH, Ijzerman MJ, Chae J
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2013 Jun;94(6):1007-1014
clinical trial
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; 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 compare the motor relearning effect of a surface peroneal nerve stimulator (PNS) versus usual care on lower limb motor impairment, activity limitation, and quality of life among chronic stroke survivors. DESIGN: Single-blinded randomized controlled trial SETTING: Teaching hospital of academic medical center PARTICIPANTS: 110 chronic stroke survivors (> 12-wks post-stroke) with unilateral hemiparesis and dorsiflexion strength of <= 4/5 on the Medical Research Council scale INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were stratified by motor impairment level and then randomized to ambulation training with either a surface PNS device or usual care (ankle foot orthosis or no device) intervention. Subjects were treated for 12-wks and followed for 6-months post-treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Lower limb portion of the Fugl-Meyer (FM) Assessment (motor impairment), the Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (mEFAP) performed without a device (functional ambulation), and the Stroke Specific Quality of Life (SSQOL) scale. RESULTS: There was no significant treatment group main effect or treatment group by time interaction effect on FM, mEFAP, or SSQOL raw scores (p > 0.05). The time effect was significant for the three raw scores (p < 0.05). However, when comparing average change scores from baseline (T1) to end of treatment (T2, 12-wks), and at 12-wks (T3) and 24-wks (T4) after end of treatment, significant differences were noted only for the mEFAP and SSQOL scores. The change in the average scores for both mEFAP and SSQOL occurred between T1 and T2, followed by relative stability thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of a motor relearning effect on lower limb motor impairment in either the PNS or usual care groups. However, both PNS and usual care groups demonstrated significant improvements in functional mobility and quality of life during the treatment period, which were maintained at 6-months follow-up.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help