Objective: To investigate whether cutaneous electrical stimulation has a role in the enhancement of sensorimotor function in chronic stroke.
Subjects and setting: Fifty-nine patients with chronic stroke received cutaneous stimulation during their three-week-long inpatient rehabilitation. Thirty-two received active treatment in the paretic hand and eight received no-current placebo treatment in the paretic hand. Nineteen patients received active stimulation of the paretic foot. None received stimulation in both upper and lower limbs.
Intervention: Cutaneous stimulation was delivered twice daily via a special glove/sock electrode.
Main outcome measures: Modified Motor Assessment Scale, 10-metre walking test, paretic limb function, limb skin sensation and somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) were performed before and after the treatment.
Results: Modified Motor Assessment Scale (p < 0.001), 10-metre walking test (p < 0.05), paretic hand function (p < 0.01), upper limb skin sensation (p < 0.01) and SEP normality classification of paretic upper limb (p < 0.01) and paretic lower limb (p < 0.5) improved significantly in the treatment group (n = 51) after three weeks of stimulation. When active hand treatment and placebo hand treatment were compared, a significant improvement in the sensory and motor function was observed only in the actively treated group.
Conclusions: Cutaneous stimulation had positive effects in the motor performance, limb sensation and the configuration of SEP of the paretic limb in chronic stroke patients.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Smith D, Akhtar A, Garraway W. Motor function after stroke. Age Ageing1985; 14: 46–48.
2.
Duncan P, Goldstein L, Horner R, Landsman P, Samsa G, Matchar D. Similar motor recovery of upper and lower extremities after stroke. Stroke1994; 25: 1181–1188.
3.
Kwakkel G, Wagenaar R, Twisk, J, Lankhorst G, Koetsier J. Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: a randomised trial. Lancet1999; 354: 1642–1643.
4.
Chae J, Bethoux F, Bohine T, Dobos L, Davis T, Friedl A. Neuromuscular stimulation for upper extremity motor and functional recovery in acute hemiplegia. Stroke1998; 29: 975–979.
5.
Feys H, De Weerdt WJ, Selz BE et al. Effect of a therapeutic intervention for the hemiplegic upper limb in the acute phase after stroke: a single-blind, randomized, controlled multicenter trial. Stroke1998; 29: 785–792.
6.
Sonde, L, Kalimo H, Fernaeus S, Viitanen M. Low TENS treatment on post-stroke paretic arm: a three-year follow up. Clin Rehabil2000; 14: 14–19.
7.
Powell, J, Pandyan AD, Granat M, Cameron M, Stott DJ. Electrical stimulation of wrist extensors in poststroke hemiplegia. Stroke1999; 30: 1384–1389.
8.
Hummelsheim H, Maier-Loth M, Eickhof C. The functional value of electrical muscle stimulation for the rehabilitation of the hand in stroke patients. Scand J Rehabil Med1997; 29: 3–10.
9.
Dimitrijevic M.M.Mesh-Glove. 1. A method for whole-hand electrical stimulation in upper motor neuron dysfunction. Scand J Rehabil Med1994; 26: 183–186.
10.
Dimitrijevic M.M., Soroker N.Mesh-Glove. 2. Modulation or residual upper limb motor control after stroke with whole-hand electric stimulation. Scand J Rehabil Med1994; 26: 187–190.
11.
Dimitrijevic M.M., Stokic D, Wawro A, Wun C. Modification of motor control of wrist extension by Mesh-Glove electrical stimulation in stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1996; 77: 252–258.
12.
Golaszewski S, Kremser M, Wagner S, Felber S, Aichner F, Dimitrijevic M.M. Functional magnetic resonance imaging of the human motor cortex before and after whole-hand afferent electrical stimulation. Scand J Rehabil Med1998; 31: 165–173.
13.
Carr J, Shepherd R, Nordholm L, Lynne D. Investigation of a New Motor Assessment Scale for stroke patients. Phys Ther1985; 65: 175–180.
14.
Nugent J, Schurr K, Adams R. A dose-response relationship between amount of weight-bearing excercise and walking outcome following cerebrovascular accident. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1994; 75: 399–402.
15.
Taylor P, 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 Rehabil1999; 80: 1577–1583.
16.
Katrak P, Bowring G, Conroy P, Chilvers M, Poulos R, McNeil D. Predicting upper limb recovery after stroke: the place of early shoulder and hand movement. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1998; 79: 758–761.
17.
Kusoffsky A, Wadell I, Nilsson B. The relationship between sensory impairment and motor recovery in patients with hemiplegia. Scand J Rehabil Med1982; 14: 22–32.
18.
Kato H, Sugawara Y, Ito H, Onodera K, Sato C, Kogure K. Somatosensory evoked potentials following stimulation of median and tibial nerves in patients with localized intracerebral hemorrhage; correlations with clinical and CT findings. J Neurol Sci1991; 103: 172–178.
19.
Chester C, McLaren C. Somatosensory evoked response and recovery from stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1989; 70: 520–525.
20.
Hallett M. Plasticity in the human motor system. Neuroscientist1999; 5: 324–332.
21.
Raineteau O, Schwab M. Plasticity of motor systems after incomplete spinal cord injury. Nat Rev Neurosci2001; 2: 263–273.
22.
Bear M, Connors B, Paradiso M. Neuroscience. Exploring the brain. The somatic sensory system and the auditory system, second edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 2001: 795–796.
