ArticleBiomedical engineering online2015
The efficacy of neuromuscular electrical stimulation with alternating currents in the kilohertz frequency to stimulate gait rhythm in rats following spinal cord injury.
Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficient Suprahyoid Muscle Contraction by Combined Modulated Currents in Mice.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Disuse plasticity limits spinal cord injury recovery.iScience · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional analysis of the characteristics of joint motion and gait pattern in a rodent model following spinal nerve ligation.Biomedical engineering online · 2021Article
- Comparison between Russian and Aussie currents in the grip strength and thickness muscles of the non-dominant hand: A double-blind, prospective, randomized-controlled study.Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2020Article
- 16-Channel biphasic current-mode programmable charge balanced neural stimulation.Biomedical engineering online · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRehabilitation facilitates the reorganization of residual/regenerated neural pathways and is key in improving motor function following spinal cord injury. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) has been reported as being clinically effective. Although it can be used after the acute phase post-injury, the optimal stimulation conditions to improve motor function remain unclear. In this paper, we examined the effectiveness of NMES with alternating currents in the kilohertz (kHz) frequency in gait rhythm stimulation therapy.
methodsTests were performed using 20 mature female Fischer rats. Incomplete spinal cord injuries (T9 level) were made with an IH impactor using a force of 150 kdyn, and NMES was administered for 3 days from the 7th day post-injury. The needle electrodes were inserted percutaneously near the motor point of each muscle in conscious rats, and each muscle on the left and right leg was stimulated for 15 min at two frequencies, 75 Hz and 8 kHz, to induce a gait rhythm. Motor function was evaluated using Basso, Beattie, Bresnahan (BBB) scores and three-dimensional (3D) gait analysis. Rats were divided into four groups (5 rats/group), including the NMES treatment 75-Hz group (iSCI-NMES 75 Hz), 8-kHz group (iSCI-NMES 8 kHz), injury control group (iSCI-NT), and normal group (Normal-CT), and were compared.
resultsThere was no significant difference in BBB scores among the three groups. In 3D gait analysis, compared with the injury control group, the 8-kHz group showed a significant improvement in synergistic movement of both hindlimbs.
conclusionWe suggest that kHz stimulation is effective in gait rhythm stimulation using NMES.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.