scholarly journals Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation for Treatment of Muscle Impairment: Critical Review and Recommendations for Clinical Practice

2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ethne L. Nussbaum ◽  
Pamela Houghton ◽  
Joseph Anthony ◽  
Sandy Rennie ◽  
Barbara L. Shay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Critical Review ◽  
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Muscle Impairment

scholarly journals Adherence to Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Interventions for Muscle Impairment in Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 117954412110287
Author(s):  
Louise C Burgess ◽  
Paul Taylor ◽  
Thomas W Wainwright ◽  
Shayan Bahadori ◽  
Ian D Swain
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Voluntary Exercise ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Joint Replacement Surgery ◽  
Patient Tolerance ◽  
Muscle Impairment

Background: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) provides a promising approach to counteract muscle impairment in hip and knee osteoarthritis, and to expedite recovery from joint replacement surgery. Nonetheless, application into clinical orthopaedic practice remains limited, partly due to concerns regarding patient tolerance. Objectives: This systematic review aimed to quantify levels of adherence to NMES interventions for muscle impairment in hip and knee osteoarthritis and identify strategies to increase compliance. Data Sources: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified in a web-based literature review, completed in December 2020. The databases sourced included the Cochrane Library, CINAHL Complete, Medline Complete and PubMed. Eligibility Criteria: Studies were included if they were: (i) conducted in cohorts of adults with hip or knee osteoarthritis; (ii) a protocol of electrical muscle stimulation prescribed to treat muscle impairment; and (iii) reported intervention adherence or attrition rate. Data were extracted on adherence rate, reasons for non-adherence and potential strategies to increase adherence. Risk of bias was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Results: The search yielded 120 articles, of which 15 studies were considered eligible and included in the analysis (n = 922). All NMES treatment was applied to the quadriceps, with 1 study targeting the quadriceps and calves. The mean PEDRO score of the included studies was 6.80 out of a possible 10 (range 6-8). Mean adherence did not differ between groups receiving treatment with NMES (85% ± 12%) and control groups receiving voluntary exercise or education (84% ± 9%) ( P = .97). Reasons for non-adherence or attrition included a dislike of the device, dizziness, pain and discomfort. Strategies to increase adherence included NMES education, a familiarisation period, supervision, setting thresholds based upon patient tolerance, monitoring pain levels during stimulation and using built-in adherence trackers. Conclusions: This systematic review indicates that adherence to NMES interventions for muscle impairment in hip and knee osteoarthritis in clinical trials does not differ to control groups receiving education or voluntary exercise, and hence should not be a barrier to application in clinical practice.

Feasibility of Superimposed Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation to the Gluteus Medius During a Resistance Training Program

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Matthew Robinson ◽  
Grant E. Norte ◽  
Amanda Murray ◽  
Neal R. Glaviano
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Resistance Training ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Gluteus Medius ◽  
Completion Rate ◽  
Knee Valgus ◽  
Treatment Credibility

Context: Gluteus medius (GMed) weakness is a common impairment seen across multiple lower-extremity pathologies. Greater GMed weakness is moderately associated with greater frontal plane motion, often termed dynamic knee valgus during functional tasks which may increase risk of lower-extremity injury. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) superimposed to targeted muscles has emerged in clinical practice; however, NMES superimposed to the GMed in unknown. It is essential to assess the safety, credibility, and expectancy of NMES superimposed to the GMed prior to implementation in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to evaluate feasibility, safety, credibility, and expectancy of improvement with a 2-week intervention with or without NMES to the GMed in females with dynamic knee valgus. Design: Feasibility study. Methods: A total of 22 adult females with dynamic knee valgus (age = 21.8 [1.4] y, mass = 76.9 [18.8] kg, height = 1.7 [0.1] m) completed a 2-week intervention with NMES or a sham treatment superimposed to the GMed during all therapeutic exercises. Feasibility was assessed by recruitment and completion rate, while safety was assessed by the total number of adverse events. Treatment credibility and expectancy was assessed with the Credibility Expectancy Questionnaire. Mixed-measure analysis of variance were used for statistical analysis (P ≤ .05). Results: Recruitment was completed in 5 months with 100% completion rate and no adverse events. There was no difference in treatment credibility between groups (NMES = 23.7 [2.3], sham = 21.7 [3.4], P = .12); however, the NMES group demonstrated a greater expectancy score (NMES = 20.0 [3.8], sham = 15.9 [5.1], P = .045). Conclusion: Resistance training with NMES superimposed to the GMed is a feasible and safe intervention that resulted in greater expectance of success. Clinicians may consider superimposing NMES to the gluteal muscles when addressing muscle weakness in individuals with dynamic knee valgus.

Understanding Athletic Trainers’ Knowledge, Intervention, and Barriers Toward Arthrogenic Muscle Inhibition

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Justin L. Rush ◽  
David A. Sherman ◽  
David M. Bazett-Jones ◽  
Christopher D. Ingersoll ◽  
Grant E. Norte
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Athletic Trainers ◽  
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Muscle Inhibition ◽  
Arthrogenic Muscle Inhibition

Context: Arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI) is a common neurophysiological response to joint injury. While athletic trainers (ATs) are constantly treating patients with AMI, it is unclear how clinicians are using the available evidence to treat the condition. Objective: To investigate ATs’ general knowledge, clinical practice, and barriers for treating AMI. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was utilized. The survey was distributed to a random sample of 3000 ATs from the National Athletic Trainers’ Association and through social media. 143 board certified ATs (age: 34.6 [10.3] y; experience: 11.7 [9.8] y) from various clinical settings and educational backgrounds were included in the analysis. Results: One hundred one respondents were able to correctly identify the definition of AMI. The majority of these respondents correctly reported that joint effusion (n = 95, 94.1%) and abnormal activity from joint receptors (n = 91, 90.1%) resulted in AMI. Of the 101 respondents, only 58 (57.4%) reported using disinhibitory interventions to treat AMI. The most frequently used evidence supported interventions were transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (n = 38, 65.5%), neuromuscular electrical stimulation (n = 33, 56.9%), and focal joint cooling (n = 25, 43.1%). The interventions used correctly most often based on current evidence were neuromuscular electrical stimulation (n = 29/33, 87.9%) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (n = 26/38, 68.4%). Overall, difficulty quantifying AMI (n = 62, 61.24%) and lack of education (n = 71, 76.2%) were most frequently perceived as barriers. Respondents that did not use disinhibitory interventions perceived lack of experience treating AMI, understanding the terminology, and access to therapeutic modalities more often than the respondents that reported using disinhibitory interventions. Conclusion: Further education about concepts and treatment about AMI is warranted for ATs. Continued understanding of ATs’ clinical practice in regard to AMI may help identify gaps in athletic training clinical education.

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation as an alternative to physical exercise in patients with COPD

2018 ◽  
pp. 59-64
Author(s):  
T. V. Kunafina ◽  
◽  
A. G. Chuchalin ◽  
A. S. Belevsky ◽  
N. N. Mescheryakova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Physical Exercise ◽  
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation

Preliminary outcomes in transcutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation use in patients with dysphagia

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (31) ◽  
pp. 167-174
Author(s):  
Codrut Sarafoleanu ◽  
Raluca Enache
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Neurodegenerative Disorders ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Congenital Abnormalities ◽  
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Therapy Options ◽  
Dysphagia Treatment ◽  
Risk Of Aspiration

Abstract Dysphagia is a common disorder associated with a large number of etiologies like aging, stroke, traumatic brain injury, head and neck cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, structural changes or congenital abnormalities. The type of the treatment and its results depend on the type, severity and the cause of dysphagia. The primary goal of dysphagia treatment is to improve the swallowing process and decrease the risk of aspiration. Along with the existing rehabilitation swallowing treatments, new adjunctive therapy options developed, one of them being the neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES). The authors present the principles of NMES, a small literature review about the results of this therapy and their experience in using transcutaneous NMES in dysphagia patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document