Chronic Stroke
Conditions
Keywords
Transcranial direct current stimulation, Neuromuscular electrical stimulation, Stroke, Rehabilitation
Brief summary
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the combination treatment strategy. A randomized, double-blinded and sham-stimulation study was conducted. Twenty-six participants with chronic stroke (onset \> 6 months) were assigned into one of three groups (tDCS combined with NMES, tDCS combined with sham NMES, or sham tDCS combined with sham NMES) by block randomization. In addition to conventional rehabilitation, all subjects received an additional protocol with a total of 15 sessions for 3 weeks (5 times per week, 30 minutes daily). The UE subscale of Fugl-Meyer assessment (UE-FMA) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) as primary outcome measures were assessed at beginning of the intervention, after 3-week of treatment, and one-month follow-up. No significant differences in the primary outcome measures at post-treatment and one-month follow-up were found among the tDCS combined with NMES group (n=9), tDCS combined with sham NMES group (n=9), and the sham tDCS combined with sham NMES group (n=8). However, significant changes in UE-FMA (from baseline to post-treatment, p= .02) and ARAT (from baseline to post-treatment, p= .04) score were found for the tDCS combined with NMES group. This preliminary study reveals that the tDCS combined with NMES appears to be beneficial to UE motor recovery after stroke but is not superior to the tDCS alone.
Detailed description
Background and objectives: Previous studies have shown that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) could be effective for promoting motor recovery of stroke patients. However, the effects of tDCS combined with NMES on upper extremity (UE) motor recovery in patients with stroke have not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the combination treatment strategy. Methods: A randomized, double-blinded and sham-stimulation study was conducted. Twenty-six participants with chronic stroke (onset \> 6 months) were assigned into one of three groups (tDCS combined with NMES, tDCS combined with sham NMES, or sham tDCS combined with sham NMES) by block randomization. In addition to conventional rehabilitation, all subjects received an additional protocol with a total of 15 sessions for 3 weeks (5 times per week, 30 minutes daily). The UE subscale of Fugl-Meyer assessment (UE-FMA) and Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) as primary outcome measures were assessed at beginning of the intervention, after 3-week of treatment, and one-month follow-up. Results: Most of the participants had mild to moderate disability in activity of daily living. No significant differences in the primary outcome measures at post-treatment and one-month follow-up were found among the tDCS combined with NMES group (n=9), tDCS combined with sham NMES group (n=9), and the sham tDCS combined with sham NMES group (n=8). However, significant changes in UE-FMA (from baseline to post-treatment, p= .02) and ARAT (from baseline to post-treatment, p= .04) score were found for the tDCS combined with NMES group. Conclusion: This preliminary study reveals that the tDCS combined with NMES appears to be beneficial to UE motor recovery after stroke but is not superior to the tDCS alone.
Interventions
COMBINATION_PRODUCTtDCS(Intelect Mobile Stimulation and Combination, DJO, France)
COMBINATION_PRODUCTNMES(Enraf Nonius, Endomed-182, Netherlands)
Sponsors
Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* First onset * Ischemic stroke * Stroke onset \> 6 months * Brunnstrom recovery stage: ≧3 * Modified Ashworth Scale Elbow flexor : ≦3
Exclusion criteria
* Severe language or cognitive impairment * Orthopaedic or neurological problems * Pregnancy * Contraindications for tDCS or NMES
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| upper extremity subscale of Fugl-Meyer assessment | at beginning of the intervention, after 3-week of treatment, and one-month follow-up | The Fugl-Meyer assessment consists of the 33-item upper-extremity (UE-FM) and 17-item lower-extremity subscales.(Fugl-Meyer et al., 1975) The items of the FM are mainly scored on a 3-point scale, from 0 to 2. The total score of the UE-FM ranges from 0 to 66. |
| Action Research Arm Test | at beginning of the intervention, after 3-week of treatment, and one-month follow-up | The ARAT(Lyle, 1981) has 19 items in four categories: grasp, grip, pinch, and gross movement. Each item is graded on a 4-point scale, from 0 to 3. The total score has a range of 0 to 57. |
Outcome results
None listed