ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Simulation of FES on the forearm with muscle-specific activation resolution.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. 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.
- Feasibility and safety of multi-field functional electrical stimulation for distal upper-limb rehabilitation after subacute stroke: a randomised controlled feasibility trial.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Functional electrical stimulation (FES) is an established method of supporting neurological rehabilitation. However, particularly on the forearm, it still cannot elicit selective muscle activations that form the basis of complex hand movements. Current research approaches in the context of selective muscle activation often attempt to enable targeted stimulation by increasing the number of electrodes and combining them in electrode arrays. In order to determine the best stimulation positions and settings, manual or semi-automated algorithms are used. This approach is limited due to experimental limitations. The supportive use of simulation studies is well-established, but existing simulation models are not suitable for analyses of selective muscle activation due to missing or arbitrarily arranged innervation zones. Methods: This study introduces a new modeling method to design a person-specific digital twin that enables the prediction of muscle activations during FES on the forearm. The designed individual model consists of three parts: an anatomically based 3D volume conductor, a muscle-specific nerve fiber arrangement in various regions of interest (ROIs), and a standard nerve model. All processes were embedded in scripts or macros to enable automated changes to the model and the simulation setup. Results: The experimental evaluation of simulated strength-duration diagrams showed good coincidence. The relative differences of the simulated amplitudes to the mean amplitude of the four experiments were in the same range as the inter-experimental differences, with mean values between 0.005 and 0.045. Based on these results, muscle-specific activation thresholds were determined and integrated into the simulation process. With this modification, simulated force-intensity curves showed good agreement with additionally measured curves. Discussion: The results show that the model is suitable for simulating realistic muscle-specific activations. Since complex hand movements are physiologically composed of individual, selective muscle activations, it can be assumed that the model is also suitable for simulating these movements. Therefore, this study presents a new and very promising approach for developing new applications and products in the context of the rehabilitation of sensorimotor disorders.
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.