ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2025
Feasibility and safety of automated multi-channel FES-assisted gait training in incomplete spinal cord injury.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Network meta-analysis of different electrical stimulation therapies for lower limb functional rehabilitation in stroke patients.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Feasibility of AI-driven multichannel FES-assisted gait and cycling training in chronic neurological disorders: a case series.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- NeuroSkinSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Acute cardiorespiratory physiological responses to functional electrically stimulated cycling in individuals with subacute phase traumatic cervical spinal cord injury.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe feasibility, safety, and efficacy of automated multi-channel functional electrical stimulation-assisted gait training was assessed in individuals with chronic incomplete spinal cord injury, using an electrical stimulation suit with built-in surface electrodes and motion capture sensors (Teslasuit).
design10-week functional electrical stimulation-assisted gait training, twice weekly for 30 min. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: Five individuals with chronic incomplete spinal cord injury (≥ 12 months post-injury, ASIA C/D, minimal Walking Index Spinal Cord Injury II ≥ 9).
methodsThe quadriceps, gluteii, hamstrings, tibialis anterior, and gastrocnemius muscles were stimulated bilaterally during gait. Feasibility and safety were evaluated via questionnaires, session adherence, and adverse events. Gait function was assessed using a 10 m walk test, Walking Index Spinal Cord Injury II, and Hoffer classification at baseline, post-intervention, and follow-up. Surface electromyography and spatiotemporal parameters (walking speed, step length and width, cadence) were recorded during the 10 m walk test.
resultsAll participants completed the training (91% adherence) with no serious adverse events. Temporary skin redness, muscle soreness, and fatigue were reported by participants. Post-intervention, 4 participants increased their walking speed, step length, and cadence, with 2 maintaining and 2 further improving at follow-up. No consistent changes were found in muscle activity post training.
conclusionAutomated multi-channel functional electrical stimulation-assisted gait training was feasible, safe, and well received. Preliminary findings suggest that gait improved in most participants, though individual responses varied. The results highlight the potential of multi-channel functional electrical stimulation-assisted gait training as a valuable tool for enhancing gait recovery.
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.