Trial reportBrain and behavior2026
Electroacupuncture for Motor Recovery in Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Trial Exploring CReST-Related Modulation.
Trial report in Brain and behavior, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUpper limb impairment is a common consequence of stroke, with unclear motor recovery mechanisms. Electroacupuncture (EA) has shown promise in promoting recovery, but its effects on the corticoreticulospinal tract (CReST), a key stroke rehabilitation pathway, remain underexplored. This study aimed to investigate the effects of EA on motor recovery and its potential modulation of CReST-related pathways in subacute stroke patients.
methodsThirty-two subacute stroke patients were randomly assigned to the EA or control group. Both groups underwent a two-week rehabilitation program, with the EA group receiving EA over the Hegu (LI4) and Quchi (LI11) acupoints before physical therapy. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) and the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) assessed motor function and spasticity before and after the intervention. Surface electromyography and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) measured motor performance and neural activity.
resultsThe EA group exhibited significant improvements in FMA-UE scores and faster premotor reaction times compared to controls. Increased StartReact incidence and altered anticipatory muscle activations were observed in the EA group. fNIRS analysis revealed an enhanced contralateral sensorimotor network (SMN) activity during the early stage of EA intervention. Additionally, more severe motor impairments were associated with greater contralesional SMN connectivity improvement during the early EA phase.
conclusionsPreliminary evidence suggests that EA at LI4 and LI11 serves as a promising adjuvant intervention to enhance upper limb motor recovery in subacute stroke; this benefit is likely mediated by the modulation of CReST-related pathway and contralesional SMN reorganization. Larger, well-controlled studies incorporating sham-EA groups are warranted to validate these findings and establish definitive causal links.
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.