Electrical stimulation of the upper extremity in stroke: cyclic versus EMG-triggered stimulation.

Author(s): de Kroon JR, Ijzerman MJ

Affiliation(s): Roessingh Research and Development, Enschede, jdekroon@spaarneziekenhuis.

Publication date & source: 2008-08, Clin Rehabil., 22(8):690-7.

Publication type:

Objective: To compare the effect of cyclic and electromyography (EMG)-triggered electrical stimulation on motor impairment and function of the affected upper extremity in chronic stroke.Design: Randomized controlled trial.Setting: Outpatient clinic of a rehabilitation centre.Subjects and intervention: Twenty-two subjects in the chronic stage after stroke were randomly assigned to receive either cyclic (n = 11) or EMG-triggered electrical stimulation (n = 11) of the wrist and finger extensor muscles for a six-week period.Outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the Action Research Arm test (0-57 points) to assess arm function. Grip strength, Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment and Motricity Index were secondary outcome measures. Assessments were made at the start of the treatment and after 4, 6 and 12 weeks.Results: Both groups improved on the Action Research Arm test. The group receiving cyclic stimulation improved by 2.3 points, and the group receiving EMG-triggered stimulation improved by 4.2 points. The difference in functional gain was not statistically significant. Differences in gain on the secondary outcome measures were not significant either.Conclusion: The present study did not detect a significant difference between EMG-triggered and cyclic electrical stimulation with respect to improvement of motor function of the affected arm in chronic stroke.