ArticlePhysiological reports2023
Transcutaneous spinal stimulation in people with and without spinal cord injury: Effect of electrode placement and trains of stimulation on threshold intensity.
Article in Physiological reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiovascular effects of transcutaneous spinal stimulation in persons living with and without spinal cord injury.Spinal cord · 2026Article
- Excitability of posterior root reflex evoked by transcutaneous spinal stimulation is distinct from the H-reflex in the soleus muscle: a pulse duration study.Journal of neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Physical Therapy for Traumatic and Non-Traumatic Spinal Cord Injuries in Adults: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation plus locomotor training versus sham-stimulation plus locomotor training in chronic spinal cord injury (eWALK): a multicentre, triple-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Effective management of orthostatic hypotension in a patient with complete spinal cord injury using a portable transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation device: A case report.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2026Article
- Transcutaneous Spinal Stimulation Modulates Spinal Reflex Circuit Excitability in Persons with Spinal Cord Injury.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Optimizing Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation: An Exploratory Study on the Role of Electrode Montages and Stimulation Intensity on Reflex Pathway Modulation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Noninvasive Electrical Modalities to Alleviate Respiratory Deficits Following Spinal Cord Injury.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Transcutaneous spinal stimulation in people with and without spinal cord injury: Effect of electrode placement and trains of stimulation on threshold intensity.Physiological reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (TSS) is purported to improve motor function in people after spinal cord injury (SCI). However, several methodology aspects are yet to be explored. We investigated whether stimulation configuration affected the intensity needed to elicit spinally evoked motor responses (sEMR) in four lower limb muscles bilaterally. Also, since stimulation intensity for therapeutic TSS (i.e., trains of stimulation, typically delivered at 15-50 Hz) is sometimes based on the single-pulse threshold intensity, we compared these two stimulation types. In non-SCI participants (n = 9) and participants with a SCI (n = 9), three different electrode configurations (cathode-anode); L1-midline (below the umbilicus), T11-midline and L1-ASIS (anterior superior iliac spine; non-SCI only) were compared for the sEMR threshold intensity using single pulses or trains of stimulation which were recorded in the vastus medialis, medial hamstring, tibialis anterior, medial gastrocnemius muscles. In non-SCI participants, the L1-midline configuration showed lower sEMR thresholds compared to T11-midline (p = 0.002) and L1-ASIS (p < 0.001). There was no difference between T11-midline and L1-midline for participants with SCI (p = 0.245). Spinally evoked motor response thresholds were ~13% lower during trains of stimulation compared to single pulses in non-SCI participants (p < 0.001), but not in participants with SCI (p = 0.101). With trains of stimulation, threshold intensities were slightly lower and the incidence of sEMR was considerably lower. Overall, stimulation threshold intensities were generally lower with the L1-midline electrode configuration and is therefore preferred. While single-pulse threshold intensities may overestimate threshold intensities for therapeutic TSS, tolerance to trains of stimulation will be the limiting factor in most cases.
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.