Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2013 Jun;94(6):1007-14.
doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.01.024. Epub 2013 Feb 8.

Randomized controlled trial of surface peroneal nerve stimulation for motor relearning in lower limb hemiparesis

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Randomized controlled trial of surface peroneal nerve stimulation for motor relearning in lower limb hemiparesis

Lynne R Sheffler et al. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Jun.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the motor relearning effect of a surface peroneal nerve stimulator (PNS) versus usual care on lower limb motor impairment, activity limitation, and quality of life among chronic stroke survivors.

Design: Single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

Setting: Teaching hospital of academic medical center.

Participants: Chronic stroke survivors (N=110; >12wk poststroke) with unilateral hemiparesis and dorsiflexion strength of ≤4/5 on the Medical Research Council scale.

Interventions: Subjects were stratified by motor impairment level and then randomly assigned to ambulation training with either a surface PNS device or usual care (ankle-foot orthosis or no device) intervention. Subjects were treated for 12 weeks and followed up for 6 months posttreatment.

Main outcome measures: Lower limb portion of the Fugl-Meyer (FM) Assessment (motor impairment), the modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile (mEFAP) performed without a device (functional ambulation), and the Stroke Specific Quality of Life (SSQOL) scale.

Results: There was no significant treatment group main effect or treatment group by time interaction effect on FM, mEFAP, or SSQOL raw scores (P>.05). The time effect was significant for the 3 raw scores (P<.05). However, when comparing average change scores from baseline (t1) to end of treatment (t2, 12wk), and at 12 weeks (t3) and 24 weeks (t4) after end of treatment, significant differences were noted only for the mEFAP and SSQOL scores. The change in the average scores for both mEFAP and SSQOL occurred between t1 and t2, followed by relative stability thereafter.

Conclusions: There was no evidence of a motor relearning effect on lower limb motor impairment in either the PNS or usual-care groups. However, both the PNS and usual-care groups demonstrated significant improvements in functional mobility and quality of life during the treatment period, which were maintained at 6-month follow-up.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00148343.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant Flow Diagram. AFO: ankle foot orthosis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Plot of adjusted means over time (weeks) for Fugl-Meyer (FM) scores including standard error bars. PNS: peroneal nerve stimulation; UC: usual care.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Plot of adjusted means over time (weeks) for the Modified Emory Functional Ambulation (mEFAP) scores (secs) including standard error bars. PNS: peroneal nerve stimulation; UC: usual care.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Plot of adjusted means over time (weeks) for the Stroke Specific Quality of Life (SSQOL) scores including standard error bars. PNS: peroneal nerve stimulation; UC: usual care.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Goldstein LB, Bushnell CD, Adams RJ, et al. Guidelines for the primary prevention of stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2011;42:517–584. - PubMed
    1. Duncan PW, Zorowitz R, Bates B, et al. Management of Adult Stroke Rehabilitation Care: a clinical practice guideline. Stroke. 2005;36:e100–e143. - PubMed
    1. Burridge JH, Taylor PN, Hagan SA, Wood DE, Swain ID. The effects of common peroneal stimulation on the effort and speed of walking: a randomized controlled trial with chronic hemiplegic patients. Clin Rehabil. 1997;11:201–210. - PubMed
    1. Stein RB, Everaert DG, Thompson AK, et al. Long-term therapeutic and orthotic effects of a foot drop stimulator on walking performance in progressive and nonprogressive neurological disorders. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:152–167. - PubMed
    1. Taylor PN, Burridge JH, Dunkerley AL, et al. Clinical use of the Odstock dropped foot stimulator: its effect on the speed and effort of walking. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80:1577–1583. - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data