Trial reportArtificial organs2025
Recumbent FES-Cycling Exercise Improves Muscle Performance and Ambulation Capacity in Hospitalized Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Artificial organs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundAcquired muscle weakness is a prevalent complication during hospitalization. Supportive technologies, such as functional electrical stimulation cycling (FES-cycling), are increasingly recognized as a tool with the potential to improve physical exercise in patients constrained to bed rest.
methodsIn this randomized clinical trial, patients admitted to a high-complexity ward exhibiting clinical signs of muscle weakness (e.g., report of loss of strength, gait, or balance deficit due to weakness or restriction to bed) were enrolled. Participants were randomly allocated to a recumbent high-intensity, low-volume FES-cycling exercise or a control group. The primary outcomes measured were torque, power output, stimulation cost (neuromuscular efficiency), and ambulation capacity.
resultsThe analysis included 16 patients (eight in each group). Postintervention, the FES-cycling group presented a greater increase in both absolute (4.25 ± 3.15 vs. 0.04 ± 3.49 Nm, p = 0.02) and percentage torque (117 ± 88 vs. 8% ± 53%, p < 0.01) compared to the control. Similarly, the FES-cycling group presented higher absolute (3.91 ± 2.25 vs. 0.57 ± 1.82 watts, p < 0.01) and percentage power (61 ± 36 vs. 10% ± 23%, p < 0.01), along with a higher absolute (-2903 ± 2598 vs. -523 ± 1319 μC/watt, p = 0.03) and percentage stimulation cost (-33 ± 18 vs. -6% ± 1 8%, p = 0.01). Additionally, enhanced ambulation capacity was observed in the FES-cycling group, with 6 patients showing improvement versus 2 in the control group (p = 0.03).
conclusionsRecumbent high-intensity, low-volume FES-cycling exercise increased muscle strength, power, and neuromuscular efficiency in hospitalized patients with muscle weakness. Improvements in ambulation capacity were also noted, supporting the intervention potential.
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.