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
. 2021 Dec;35(12):1059-1064.
doi: 10.1177/15459683211046259. Epub 2021 Sep 29.

Repetitive Peripheral Sensory Stimulation as an Add-On Intervention for Upper Limb Rehabilitation in Stroke: A Randomized Trial

Adriana B Conforto  1   2   3 , André G Machado  4   5 , Nathalia H V Ribeiro  1 , Ela B Plow  4   5 , Sook-Lei Liew  6 , Claudia da Costa Leite  3   7 , Artemis Zavaliangos-Petropulu  6 , Isabella Menezes  1 , Sarah M Dos Anjos  8 , Rafael Luccas  1 , Paul Hunter Peckham  9 , Leonardo G Cohen  10
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Repetitive Peripheral Sensory Stimulation as an Add-On Intervention for Upper Limb Rehabilitation in Stroke: A Randomized Trial

Adriana B Conforto et al. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2021 Dec.

Abstract

Introduction: Repetitive peripheral sensory stimulation (RPSS) followed by 4-hour task-specific training (TST) improves upper limb motor function in subjects with stroke who experience moderate to severe motor upper limb impairments. Here, we compared effects of RPSS vs sham followed by a shorter duration of training in subjects with moderate to severe motor impairments in the chronic phase after stroke.

Methods: This single-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial compared effects of 18 sessions of either 1.5 h of active RPSS or sham followed by a supervised session that included 45 min of TST of the paretic upper limb. In both groups, subjects were instructed to perform functional tasks at home, without supervision. The primary outcome measure was the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) after 6 weeks of treatment. Grasp and pinch strength were secondary outcomes.

Results: In intention-to-treat analysis, WMFT improved significantly in both active and sham groups at 3 and 6 weeks of treatment. Grasp strength improved significantly in the active, but not in the sham group, at 3 and 6 weeks. Pinch strength improved significantly in both groups at 3 weeks, and only in the active group at 6 weeks.

Conclusions: The between-group difference in changes in WMFT was not statistically significant. Despite the short duration of supervised treatment, WMFT improved significantly in subjects treated with RPSS or sham. These findings are relevant to settings that impose constraints in duration of direct contact between therapists and patients. In addition, RPSS led to significant gains in hand strength.Trial Registry Name: Peripheral Nerve Stimulation and Motor Training in Stroke Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT0265878 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02658578.

Keywords: cerebrovascular accident; neuromodulation; rehabilitation; sensory; upper extremity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of conflicting interests

Dr. Machado reports other from Enspire DBS, outside the submitted work. In addition, Dr. Machado has a patent 8,190,263 issued to Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Liew reports grants from the National Institutes of Health during the conduct of the study. Dr. Conforto, Dr. Ribeiro, Dr. Menezes, Dr. dos Anjos and Dr. Luccas received funding from the National Institutes of Health (grant R01NS076348-01) during the conduct of the study. The other authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Changes in grasp strength at three and six weeks, normalized to baseline, in each subject in the active (left) and sham (right) groups. *P ≤ 0.025.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Conforto AB, Dos Anjos SM, Bernardo WM, et al. Repetitive peripheral sensory stimulation and upper limb performance in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2018;32:863–871. 10.1177/1545968318798943 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Carrico C, Chelette KC 2nd, Westgate PM, et al. Nerve stimulation enhances task-oriented training in chronic, severe motor deficit after stroke: a randomized trial. Stroke 2016;47:1879–1884. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.012671 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Krishnamurthi RV, Ikeda T, Feigin VL. Global, regional and country-specific burden of ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage and subarachnoid haemorrhage: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Neuroepidemiology 2020;54:171–179. 10.1159/000506396 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kimberley TJ, Lewis SM, Auerbac EJ, Dorsey LL, Lojovich JM, Carey JR. Electrical stimulation driving functional improvements and cortical changes in subjects with stroke. Exp Brain Res 2004;154:450–460. 10.1007/s00221-003-1695-y - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alon G, Levitt AF, McCarthy PA. Functional electrical stimulation enhancement of upper extremity functional recovery during stroke rehabilitation: a pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2007;21:207–215. 10.1177/1545968306297871 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data