Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29132379›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2017

Effects of somatosensory electrical stimulation on motor function and cortical oscillations.

Adelyn P Tu-Chan, Nikhilesh Natraj, Jason Godlove, Gary Abrams, Karunesh Ganguly

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03176550 (Effects of Somatosensory Electrical Simulation On Motor Function and Cortical Oscillations), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03176550 nacompletednot on this map

Effects of Somatosensory Electrical Simulation On Motor Function and Cortical Oscillations

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, San FranciscoRan2014 to 2015Enrolled8ConditionsStrokeArmsTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Adelyn P Tu-ChanDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, USA. Adelyn.Tu@ucsf.edu.
Nikhilesh NatrajDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Jason GodloveDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Gary AbramsDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Karunesh GangulyDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, USA. Karunesh.Ganguly@ucsf.edu.
University of California, San Francisco · USSan Francisco VA Medical Center · US

Funding

Optimizing peripheral stimulation parameters to modulate the sensorimotor cortex for post-stroke motor recoveryR01MH111871 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GANGULY, KARUNESH · 2016 to 2019
$2.0M
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation 2013101National Institute of Mental Health R01MH111871NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH111871
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew patients recover full hand dexterity after an acquired brain injury such as stroke. Repetitive somatosensory electrical stimulation (SES) is a promising method to promote recovery of hand function. However, studies using SES have largely focused on gross motor function; it remains unclear if it can modulate distal hand functions such as finger individuation.

objectiveThe specific goal of this study was to monitor the effects of SES on individuation as well as on cortical oscillations measured using EEG, with the additional goal of identifying neurophysiological biomarkers.

methodsEight participants with a history of acquired brain injury and distal upper limb motor impairments received a single two-hour session of SES using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Pre- and post-intervention assessments consisted of the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), finger fractionation, pinch force, and the modified Ashworth scale (MAS), along with resting-state EEG monitoring.

resultsSES was associated with significant improvements in ARAT, MAS and finger fractionation. Moreover, SES was associated with a decrease in low frequency (0.9-4 Hz delta) ipsilesional parietomotor EEG power. Interestingly, changes in ipsilesional motor theta (4.8-7.9 Hz) and alpha (8.8-11.7 Hz) power were significantly correlated with finger fractionation improvements when using a multivariate model.

conclusionsWe show the positive effects of SES on finger individuation and identify cortical oscillations that may be important electrophysiological biomarkers of individual responsiveness to SES. These biomarkers can be potential targets when customizing SES parameters to individuals with hand dexterity deficits.

trial registrationNCT03176550; retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyMovementTranscutaneous Electric Nerve StimulationAdultAgedAlpha RhythmBiomechanical PhenomenaBrain InjuriesCerebral CortexFemaleFingersHandHumansMaleMiddle AgedMovement DisordersBrain injuryElectroencephalographyRehabilitationStrokeTranscutaneous electric nerve stimulationUpper extremity

Identifiers

PMID29132379
PMCPMC5683582
OpenAlexW2769552296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.