ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Functional electrical stimulation enhances motor control in stroke rehabilitation.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2025. 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.
- Functional Electrical Stimulation and Stroke Rehabilitation Research: The Critical Role of Sham Control Groups.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2026Article
- Stem Cells in Post-Stroke Regenerative Therapy: Current Role of Wharton's Jelly Mesenchymal Stem Cells in the Orchestrum.Brain sciences · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the effectiveness of functional electrical stimulation (FES) in enhancing motor control in stroke survivors.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted on clinical data from 150 stroke patients with lower-limb motor dysfunction, treated at Hunan Provincial People's Hospital from January 2023 to January 2024. Patients were divided into three groups: a control group (conventional rehabilitation), a CPN-FES group (conventional rehabilitation + calf muscle functional stimulation), and a TA-FES group (conventional rehabilitation + tibialis anterior functional stimulation). The data collected included F-wave latency and amplitude, H-reflex changes, lower-limb motor function, walking and balance abilities, mental status, and activities of daily living. The outcomes across the groups were compared to assess the efficacy of FES in improving motor control in stroke patients.
resultsThe study found that integrating electrical stimulation with early rehabilitation markedly enhanced stroke patients' recovery. After 8 weeks, improvements were observed in lower-limb motor function, walking and balance, cognitive status, and daily living activities. The CPN-FES group showed the greatest improvements, followed by the TA-FES group, while the control group demonstrated the least improvement. Additionally, FES therapy improved nerve conduction and reduced muscle spasticity, as evidenced by changes in F-wave and H-reflex measurements.
conclusionThe use of functional electrical stimulation in stroke rehabilitation appears to enhance motor control and improve functional outcomes. This approach merits further investigation in a clinical setting.
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.