Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35095554›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in physiology2021

Neuromuscular or Sensory Electrical Stimulation for Reconditioning Motor Output and Postural Balance in Older Subjects?

Thierry Paillard

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

1 author.

Thierry PaillardLaboratoire Mouvement, Equilibre, Performance et Santé, EA 4445, Département STAPS, Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour, E2S, Tarbes, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Percutaneous electrical stimulation is used for reconditioning functional capabilities in older subjects. However, its optimal application depends on the specific physiological needs of the individual. Depending on whether his/her needs are related to motor function or sensory and central functions, the relevant modality of electrical stimulation differs significantly. In fact, there are two main modalities of electrical stimulation, that is, neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) and sensory electrical stimulation (SES). NMES involves high-intensity currents (above the motor threshold) and provokes involuntary visible direct muscle contractions. With chronic application, the induced adaptations occur mainly at the neuromuscular function level and thus enhance muscle strength/power and motor output. SES involves low-intensity currents (below, at or only just above the sensory threshold), does not induce any visible muscle contraction and provides only sensory information. With chronic application, the induced adaptations occur at the level of potentiation and transmission of proprioceptive afferents and thus facilitate sensorimotor activity (movement and balance). Overall, SES is interesting for the improvement/maintenance of sensorimotor capabilities in non-frail older subjects while NMES is relevant to develop muscle strength/power and thus reduce the risk of falls due to a lack of muscle strength/power in frail older subjects.

Indexed as

agingbalanceelderlyelectrical stimulationfallmuscle electrical stimulationmuscle strengthsomatosensory electrical stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35095554
PMCPMC8791235

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.