ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2020
Safety and Feasibility of Various Functional Electrical Stimulation Cycling Protocols in Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis Who Are Nonambulatory.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of Functional Electrical Stimulation Cycling on Fatigue and Quality of Life in People with Multiple Sclerosis Who Are Nonambulatory.International journal of MS careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the safety, feasibility, and response to functional electrical stimulation (FES) cycling protocols requiring differing levels of effort in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) who are nonambulatory.
designPilot study with pre-post intervention testing.
settingOutpatient clinic setting of a long-term acute care hospital.
participantsIndividuals (N=10) with MS (6 men; mean age 58.6±9.86y) who use a wheelchair for community mobility. Participants' Expanded Disability Status Scale score ranged from 6.5 to 8.5 (median 7.5).
interventionParticipants performed 3 or 4 FES cycling protocols requiring different levels of volitional effort during 6-8 testing sessions.
main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was safety, measured by adverse events and increase in MS symptoms, all assessed throughout, immediately post- and 1 day postsession. FES cycling performance for each protocol was also recorded. Exploratory outcome measures collected before and after all testing sessions included functional assessment of MS, MS Impact Scale, Exercise Self Efficacy Scale, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item, and the Zarit Caregiver Burden Scale.
resultsAll participants (4 women, 6 men) completed all testing sessions. There were no serious adverse events or differences in vitals or symptoms between protocols. Two participants had an isolated episode of mild hypotension. Changes in pain, spasticity, and fatigue were minimal. Five participants were able to cycle for 30 minutes and completed interval training protocols requiring increasing difficulty. The remainder cycled for <3 minutes and completed a rest interval protocol. There was modest improvement on the exploratory outcome measures.
conclusionsPeople with MS who use a wheelchair for community mobility can safely perform FES cycling requiring more effort than previously reported research. Therefore, the individuals may experience greater benefits than previously reported. Further study is required to better understand the potential benefits for optimizing function and improving health in people with MS.
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.