ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022
Effects of motor stimulation of the tibial nerve on corticospinal excitability of abductor hallucis and pelvic floor muscles.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of neuromodulation on neurogenic bladder in women with multiple sclerosis: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Neurodegenerative disease managementTrial
- Non-invasive spinal cord neuromodulation enables volitional anti-gravity leg movements after motor-complete spinal cord injury: responders vs. non-responders.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Observational
- Functional Recovery and Regenerative Effects of Direct Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treatment of Post-COVID-19 Guillain-Barré and Acute Transverse Myelitis Overlap Syndrome: A Clinical Case.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
- Hierarchical Bayesian estimation of motor-evoked potential recruitment curves yields accurate and robust estimates.Brain stimulationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Peripheral nerve stimulation can modulate the excitability of corticospinal pathways of muscles in the upper and lower limbs. Further, the pattern of peripheral nerve stimulation (continuous vs. intermittent) may be an important factor determining the modulation of this corticospinal excitability. The pelvic floor muscles (PFM) are crucial for maintaining urinary continence in humans, and share spinal segmental innervation with the tibial nerve. We explored the idea of whether the neuromodulatory effects of tibial nerve stimulation (TibNS) could induce effects on somatic pathways to the PFM. We evaluated the effects of two patterns of stimulation (intermittent vs. continuous) on corticospinal excitability of the PFM compared to its effect on the abductor hallucis (AH) muscle (which is directly innervated by the tibial nerve). We hypothesized that intermittent TibNS would increase, while continuous stimulation would decrease, the excitability of both AH and PFM. Methods: Twenty able-bodied adults (20-33 years of age) enrolled in this study. TibNS was delivered either intermittently (1 ms pulses delivered at 30Hz with an on:off duty cycle of 600:400 ms, for 60 min), or continuously (1 ms pulses delivered at 30Hz for 36 min) just above the motor threshold of the AH. We randomized the order of the stimulation pattern and tested them on separate days. We used surface electromyography (EMG) to record motor-evoked responses (MEP) in the PFM and AH following transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). We generated stimulus-response (SR) curves to quantify the changes in peak-to-peak MEP amplitude relative to TMS intensity to assess changes in corticospinal excitability pre- and post-stimulation. Results and Conclusion: We found that TibNS increased corticospinal excitability only to AH, with no effects in PFM. There was no difference in responses to continuous vs. intermittent stimulation. Our results indicate a lack of effect of TibNS on descending somatic pathways to the PFM, but further investigation is required to explore other stimulation parameters and whether neuromodulatory effects may be spinal in origin.
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.