Trial reportScientific reports2025
Electrically induced hemodynamic enhancement via sock-integrated electrodes is more comfortable and efficient at 1 hz as compared to 36 hz.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06082297 (Can Blood Flow Enhancing Plantar Flexion Electrically Induced Via Textile Electrodes in a Sock Using 1 Hz Frequency Give Better Comfort and Energy Efficiency as Compared to 36 Hz ?), which is not on this 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.
Can Blood Flow Enhancing Plantar Flexion Electrically Induced Via Textile Electrodes in a Sock Using 1 Hz Frequency Give Better Comfort and Energy Efficiency as Compared to 36 Hz ?
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Enhancement of Cerebral Oxygenation by Lower-Limb Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Stroke Survivors.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Observational
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
This study evaluated the hemodynamic effects, discomfort, and energy efficiency of low-intensity neuromuscular electrical stimulation (LI-NMES) of the calf delivered via sock-integrated transverse textile electrodes (TTE) at different frequencies and plateau times. Fifteen healthy participants underwent NMES stimulation through 3 × 3 cm TTE with ten combinations of frequency (1-36 Hz) and plateau times (0.5-7 s). NMES was increased until plantar flexion occurred, at which point ultrasound-measurements were made of popliteal peak venous velocity (PVV), time-averaged mean velocity (TAMV), average duration of blood flow pulse (ADBP) and ejection volume (EV). Discomfort (NRS, 0-10), current amplitude, and energy consumption were recorded. Median values were analyzed with significance set at p < 0.05. Both 1 Hz and 36 Hz C-LI-NMES significantly improved PVV and TAMV (p ≤ 0.008). EV increased significantly for plateau times of 1.5, 5.0, and 7.0 s (p < 0.05). Compared to 36 Hz, 1 Hz showed significantly lower discomfort (NRS: 0.4 vs. 1.6) and energy consumption (0.4 vs. 31.3 mJ, both p ≤ 0.01) but required higher current amplitude (33.2 vs. 23.3 mA, p < 0.01) to reach plantar flexion. The study concludes that both 1 Hz and 36 Hz frequency improve venous hemodynamics, but 1 Hz stimulation minimizes discomfort and energy use while maintaining effectiveness.Trial registration: Retrospectively registered with Clinical Trials, trial ID: NCT06082297.
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.