ArticleBMJ open2019
Rationale and design of the theRapeutic effects of peroneal nerve functionAl electrical stimuLation for Lower extremitY in patients with convalescent poststroke hemiplegia (RALLY) study: study protocol for a randomised controlled study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Functional Electrical Stimulation in Convalescent Stroke Patients: A Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Development of clinical guidelines for service provision of functional electrical stimulation to support walking: mixed method exploration of stakeholder views.BMC neurology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIncreasing evidence supports the utilisation of functional electrical stimulation (FES) to improve gait following stroke; however, few studies have focused exclusively on its use in the convalescent phase. In addition, its efficacy in patients with a non-Western life style has not been evaluated. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a randomised, controlled, open-label multicentre study, comparing rehabilitation with and without FES. The purpose of our study is to test the hypothesis that the FES system improves walking ability in Japanese patients with hemiplegia during the convalescent phase. Two hundred patients aged 20-85 years who had an initial stroke ≤6 months prior to the enrolment, are in a convalescent phase (after the end of acute phase treatment, within 6 months after the onset of stroke) with functional ambulation classification 3 or 4 and have a hemiplegic gait disorder (drop foot) due to stroke have been recruited from 21 institutions in Japan. The patients are randomised in 1:1 fashion to usual gait rehabilitation or rehabilitation using FES (Walkaide). The trial duration is 8 weeks, and the primary outcome measured will be the change in maximum distance from baseline to the end of the trial, as measured with the 6 min walk test (6-MWT). The 6-MWT is performed barefoot, and the two treatment groups are compared using the analysis of covariance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the Ethical Guidelines for Medical and Health Research Involving Human Subjects and is approved by the ethics committee of all participating institutions. The published results will be disseminated to all the participants by the study physicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The University Hospital Medical Information Network-Clinical Studies Registry (UMIN000020604).
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.