ArticlePloS one2024
Synergistic effects of transcutaneous spinal stimulation and neuromuscular electrical stimulation on lower limb force production: Time to deliver.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurophysiological Effect of Transcutaneous Electrical Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Complete Spinal Cord Injury.Artificial organs · 2025Trial
- Recent advances in electroactive biomaterials and electrical stimulation for skeletal muscle regeneration: materials, strategies, and mechanistic insights.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTranscutaneous spinal stimulation (TSS) and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) can facilitate self-assisted standing in individuals with paralysis. However, individual variability in responses to each modality may limit their effectiveness in generating the necessary leg extension force for full body weight standing. To address this challenge, we proposed combining TSS and NMES to enhance leg extensor muscle activation, with optimizing timing adjustment to maximize the interaction between the two modalities.
methodsTo assess the effects of TSS and NMES on knee extension and plantarflexion force, ten neurologically intact participants underwent three conditions: (1) TSS control, (2) NMES control, and (3) TSS + NMES. TSS was delivered between the T10 and L2 vertebrae, while NMES was delivered to the skin over the right knee extensors and plantarflexors. TSS and NMES were administered using a 15 Hz train of three 0.5 ms biphasic pulses. During the TSS + NMES condition, the timing between modalities was adjusted in increments of ¼ the interval within a 15 Hz frequency, i.e., 66, 49.5, 33, 16.5, and 1 ms.
resultsNMES combined with TSS, produced synergistic effects even on non-targeted muscle groups, thereby promoting leg extension across multiple joints in the kinematic chain. The sequence of NMES or TSS trains relative to each other did not significantly impact motor output. Notably, a delay of 16.5 to 49.5 ms between interleaved TSS and NMES pulses, each delivered at 15 Hz, results in more robust and synergistic responses in knee extensors and plantarflexors.
conclusionsBy adjusting the timing between TSS and NMES, we can optimize the combined use of these modalities for functional restoration. Our findings highlight the potential of integrated TSS and NMES protocols to enhance motor function, suggesting promising avenues for therapeutic applications, particularly in the rehabilitation of individuals with SCI.
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.