Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Stroke
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Stroke. 2005;36:80-85
Published online before print November 29, 2004, doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000149623.24906.63
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
36/1/80    most recent
01.STR.0000149623.24906.63v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yan, T.
Right arrow Articles by Li, L. S. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yan, T.
Right arrow Articles by Li, L. S. W.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
Medline Plus Health Information
*Stroke
Related Collections
Right arrow Rehabilitation, Stroke

(Stroke. 2005;36:80.)
© 2005 American Heart Association, Inc.


Original Contributions

Functional Electrical Stimulation Improves Motor Recovery of the Lower Extremity and Walking Ability of Subjects With First Acute Stroke

A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Tiebin Yan, MD, PhD; Christina W. Y. Hui-Chan, PhD Leonard S. W. Li, MD

From the Department of Rehabilitation Sciences (T.Y., C.W.Y.H.C.), The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong; and the Department of Medicine (L.S.W.L.), Tung Wah Hospital, Hong Kong University.

Correspondence to Dr Christina W. Y. Hui-Chan, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hum, Kowloon, Hong Kong (SAR), China. E-mail rschris{at}inet.polyu.edu.hk

Background and Purpose— The effectiveness of functional electrical stimulation (FES) has been investigated in chronic hemiplegia. The present study examines whether FES, given during acute stroke, was more effective in promoting motor recovery of the lower extremity and walking ability than standard rehabilitation alone.

Methods— Forty-six subjects, 70.9±8.0 years old and 9.2±4.1 days after stroke, were assigned randomly to 1 of 3 groups receiving standard rehabilitation with FES or placebo stimulation or alone (control). FES was applied 30 minutes and placebo stimulation 60 minutes, 5 days per week for 3 weeks. Outcome measurements included composite spasticity score, maximum isometric voluntary contraction of ankle dorsi-flexors and planter-flexors, and walking ability. They were recorded before treatment, weekly during the 3-week treatment, and at week 8 after stroke.

Results— No significant differences were found in the baseline measurements. After 3 weeks of treatment, there was a significant reduction in the percentage of composite spasticity score, and a significant improvement in the ankle dorsiflexion torque, accompanied by an increase in agonist electromyogram and a reduction in electromyogram cocontraction ratio in the FES group, when compared with the other 2 groups (P<0.05). All subjects in the FES group were able to walk after treatment, and 84.6% of them returned home, in comparison with the placebo (53.3%) and control (46.2%, P<0.05) groups.

Conclusions— Fifteen sessions of FES, applied to subjects with acute stroke plus standard rehabilitation, improved their motor and walking ability to the degree that more subjects were able to return to home.


Key Words: motor activity • stroke




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ptjournalHome page
K. Dunning, K. Black, A. Harrison, K. McBride, and S. Israel
Neuroprosthesis Peroneal Functional Electrical Stimulation in the Acute Inpatient Rehabilitation Setting: A Case Series
Physical Therapy, May 1, 2009; 89(5): 499 - 506.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ptjournalHome page
A. I. Kottink, H. J Hermens, A. V Nene, M. J Tenniglo, C. G Groothuis-Oudshoorn, and M. J IJzerman
Therapeutic Effect of an Implantable Peroneal Nerve Stimulator in Subjects With Chronic Stroke and Footdrop: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Physical Therapy, April 1, 2008; 88(4): 437 - 448.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ptjournalHome page
A. R. Lindquist, C. L Prado, R. M. Barros, R. Mattioli, P. H L. da Costa, and T. F Salvini
Gait Training Combining Partial Body-Weight Support, a Treadmill, and Functional Electrical Stimulation: Effects on Poststroke Gait
Physical Therapy, September 1, 2007; 87(9): 1144 - 1154.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Physiol.Home page
J. W. Stinear and T. G. Hornby
Stimulation-induced changes in lower limb corticomotor excitability during treadmill walking in humans
J. Physiol., September 1, 2005; 567(2): 701 - 711.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
StrokeHome page
H. Woldag and C. W.Y. Hui-Chan
Modern Therapeutic Approaches in the Rehabilitation of Walking Ability After Stroke * Response:
Stroke, May 1, 2005; 36(5): 932 - 933.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
B. H. Dobkin
Rehabilitation after Stroke
N. Engl. J. Med., April 21, 2005; 352(16): 1677 - 1684.
[Full Text] [PDF]