Electrical Stimulation of the Upper Limb in Stroke: Stimulation of the Extensors of the Hand vs. Alternate Stimulation of Flexors and Extensors

J.R. de Kroon, Maarten Joost IJzerman, G.J. Lankhorst, G. Zilvold

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademic

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether there is a difference in functional improvement in the affected arm of chronic stroke patients when comparing two methods of electrical stimulation. Design: Explanatory trial in which 30 chronic stroke patients with impaired arm function were randomly allocated to either alternating electrical stimulation of the extensor and flexor muscles of the hand (group A) or electrical stimulation of the extensors only (group B). Primary outcome measure was the Action Research Arm test to assess arm function. Grip strength, Motricity Index, Ashworth Scale, and range of motion of the wrist were secondary outcome measures. Results: Improvement on the Action Research Arm test was 1.0 point in group A and 3.3 points in group B; the difference in functional gain was 2.3 points (95% confidence interval, -1.06 to 5.60). The success rate (i.e., percentage of patients with a clinically relevant improvement of >5.7 points on the Action Research Arm test) was 27% in group B (four patients) and 8% in group A (one patient). The differences in functional gain and success rate were not statistically significant, neither were the differences between the two groups on the secondary outcome measures. Conclusion: The difference between the two stimulation strategies was not statistically significant
Original languageUndefined
Pages (from-to)592-600
JournalAmerican journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation
Volume83
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2004

Keywords

  • IR-76984

Cite this

@article{aae310acfb904e4c80e96639e1367cbb,
title = "Electrical Stimulation of the Upper Limb in Stroke: Stimulation of the Extensors of the Hand vs. Alternate Stimulation of Flexors and Extensors",
abstract = "Objective: To investigate whether there is a difference in functional improvement in the affected arm of chronic stroke patients when comparing two methods of electrical stimulation. Design: Explanatory trial in which 30 chronic stroke patients with impaired arm function were randomly allocated to either alternating electrical stimulation of the extensor and flexor muscles of the hand (group A) or electrical stimulation of the extensors only (group B). Primary outcome measure was the Action Research Arm test to assess arm function. Grip strength, Motricity Index, Ashworth Scale, and range of motion of the wrist were secondary outcome measures. Results: Improvement on the Action Research Arm test was 1.0 point in group A and 3.3 points in group B; the difference in functional gain was 2.3 points (95{\%} confidence interval, -1.06 to 5.60). The success rate (i.e., percentage of patients with a clinically relevant improvement of >5.7 points on the Action Research Arm test) was 27{\%} in group B (four patients) and 8{\%} in group A (one patient). The differences in functional gain and success rate were not statistically significant, neither were the differences between the two groups on the secondary outcome measures. Conclusion: The difference between the two stimulation strategies was not statistically significant",
keywords = "IR-76984",
author = "{de Kroon}, J.R. and IJzerman, {Maarten Joost} and G.J. Lankhorst and G. Zilvold",
year = "2004",
doi = "10.1097/01.PHM.0000133435.61610.55",
language = "Undefined",
volume = "83",
pages = "592--600",
journal = "American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation",
issn = "0894-9115",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "8",

}

Electrical Stimulation of the Upper Limb in Stroke: Stimulation of the Extensors of the Hand vs. Alternate Stimulation of Flexors and Extensors. / de Kroon, J.R.; IJzerman, Maarten Joost; Lankhorst, G.J.; Zilvold, G.

In: American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation, Vol. 83, No. 8, 2004, p. 592-600.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademic

TY - JOUR

T1 - Electrical Stimulation of the Upper Limb in Stroke: Stimulation of the Extensors of the Hand vs. Alternate Stimulation of Flexors and Extensors

AU - de Kroon, J.R.

AU - IJzerman, Maarten Joost

AU - Lankhorst, G.J.

AU - Zilvold, G.

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - Objective: To investigate whether there is a difference in functional improvement in the affected arm of chronic stroke patients when comparing two methods of electrical stimulation. Design: Explanatory trial in which 30 chronic stroke patients with impaired arm function were randomly allocated to either alternating electrical stimulation of the extensor and flexor muscles of the hand (group A) or electrical stimulation of the extensors only (group B). Primary outcome measure was the Action Research Arm test to assess arm function. Grip strength, Motricity Index, Ashworth Scale, and range of motion of the wrist were secondary outcome measures. Results: Improvement on the Action Research Arm test was 1.0 point in group A and 3.3 points in group B; the difference in functional gain was 2.3 points (95% confidence interval, -1.06 to 5.60). The success rate (i.e., percentage of patients with a clinically relevant improvement of >5.7 points on the Action Research Arm test) was 27% in group B (four patients) and 8% in group A (one patient). The differences in functional gain and success rate were not statistically significant, neither were the differences between the two groups on the secondary outcome measures. Conclusion: The difference between the two stimulation strategies was not statistically significant

AB - Objective: To investigate whether there is a difference in functional improvement in the affected arm of chronic stroke patients when comparing two methods of electrical stimulation. Design: Explanatory trial in which 30 chronic stroke patients with impaired arm function were randomly allocated to either alternating electrical stimulation of the extensor and flexor muscles of the hand (group A) or electrical stimulation of the extensors only (group B). Primary outcome measure was the Action Research Arm test to assess arm function. Grip strength, Motricity Index, Ashworth Scale, and range of motion of the wrist were secondary outcome measures. Results: Improvement on the Action Research Arm test was 1.0 point in group A and 3.3 points in group B; the difference in functional gain was 2.3 points (95% confidence interval, -1.06 to 5.60). The success rate (i.e., percentage of patients with a clinically relevant improvement of >5.7 points on the Action Research Arm test) was 27% in group B (four patients) and 8% in group A (one patient). The differences in functional gain and success rate were not statistically significant, neither were the differences between the two groups on the secondary outcome measures. Conclusion: The difference between the two stimulation strategies was not statistically significant

KW - IR-76984

U2 - 10.1097/01.PHM.0000133435.61610.55

DO - 10.1097/01.PHM.0000133435.61610.55

M3 - Article

VL - 83

SP - 592

EP - 600

JO - American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation

JF - American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation

SN - 0894-9115

IS - 8

ER -