Trial reportEuropean geriatric medicine2025
Feasibility within-subject RCT of neuromuscular electrical stimulation; an Intervention to Maintain and improve neuroMuscular function during period of Immobility (IMMI).
Trial report in European geriatric medicine, 2025. 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.
- Advances in electrical stimulation-based therapeutic technologies for sarcopenia prevention and treatment.Bioactive materials · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNeuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is a potentially effective intervention to improve outcomes after a fragility fracture, but its feasibility in this group has not been established.
methodsA feasibility study was conducted in two phases: 1) in the hospital only, and 2) hospital, rehabilitation centres, and participants' homes. Patients with fragility fracture were randomised to receive NMES for 6 weeks/discharge either to the right or left leg, with the other leg serving as control. Patients who had no mobility issues had contraindications to NMES and were unable to give consent were excluded. NMES was applied to quadriceps and tibialis anterior muscles for 30 min, 3 days/week. Sessions were progressed to achieve 60 min, 5-7 days/week. Feasibility outcomes included participant characteristics, recruitment rate, tolerability, and number of NMES sessions. Clinical outcomes included muscle strength, and ADL at six months.
resultsOverall, 1052 patients were identified, of whom 113 (11%) were eligible, and 29 (3%) were recruited (median Clinical Frailty Score 3, median Barthel ADL score 93/100). The recruitment rate was 0.45/week in phase 1 and 0.9/week in phase 2. Fifty-three percent achieved the target of 24 NMES sessions. However, 5/29 withdrew due to intolerance of NMES. Leg muscle strength improved in both treated and untreated legs, with marginally greater improvement observed in the tibialis anterior of treated legs.
conclusionAlthough it would be feasible to evaluate the specific effect of NMES in fragility fracture patients in a multi-centre trial using home-based NMES, this would be possible only in a minority of mildly frail fragility fracture patients with little premorbid disability.
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.