Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34118958›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2021

Functional electrical stimulation cycling exercise after spinal cord injury: a systematic review of health and fitness-related outcomes.

Jan W van der Scheer, Victoria L Goosey-Tolfrey, Sydney E Valentino, Glen M Davis, Chester H Ho

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  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.

Jan W van der ScheerPeter Harrison Centre for Disability Sport, School for Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Epinal Way, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK.
Victoria L Goosey-TolfreyPeter Harrison Centre for Disability Sport, School for Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Epinal Way, Loughborough, LE11 3TU, UK.
Sydney E ValentinoDepartment of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Room IWC EG115, 1280 Main St. W., Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Glen M DavisDiscipline of Exercise and Sport Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Chester H HoDivision of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2R3, Canada. chho@ualberta.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-4238-5506

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe objective of this review was to summarize and appraise evidence on functional electrical stimulation (FES) cycling exercise after spinal cord injury (SCI), in order to inform the development of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.

methodsPubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, and CINAHL were searched up to April 2021 to identify FES cycling exercise intervention studies including adults with SCI. In order to capture the widest array of evidence available, any outcome measure employed in such studies was considered eligible. Two independent reviewers conducted study eligibility screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal using Cochranes' Risk of Bias or Downs and Black tools. Each study was designated as a Level 1, 2, 3 or 4 study, dependent on study design and quality appraisal scores. The certainty of the evidence for each outcome was assessed using GRADE ratings ('High', 'Moderate', 'Low', or 'Very low').

resultsNinety-two studies met the eligibility criteria, comprising 999 adults with SCI representing all age, sex, time since injury, lesion level and lesion completeness strata. For muscle health (e.g., muscle mass, fiber type composition), significant improvements were found in 3 out of 4 Level 1-2 studies, and 27 out of 32 Level 3-4 studies (GRADE rating: 'High'). Although lacking Level 1-2 studies, significant improvements were also found in nearly all of 35 Level 3-4 studies on power output and aerobic fitness (e.g., peak power and oxygen uptake during an FES cycling test) (GRADE ratings: 'Low').

conclusionCurrent evidence indicates that FES cycling exercise improves lower-body muscle health of adults with SCI, and may increase power output and aerobic fitness. The evidence summarized and appraised in this review can inform the development of the first international, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the use of FES cycling exercise in clinical and community settings of adults with SCI. Registration review protocol: CRD42018108940 (PROSPERO).

Indexed as

Electric Stimulation TherapySpinal Cord InjuriesAdultElectric StimulationExerciseExercise TherapyHumansClinical practice guidelinesExerciseFunctional electrical stimulationSpinal cord injurySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34118958
PMCPMC8196442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.