Deans' stroke musings: Upper-limb recovery after stroke: A randomized controlled trial comparing EMG-triggered, cyclic, and sensory electrical stimulation

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Wednesday, March 28, 2018

Upper-limb recovery after stroke: A randomized controlled trial comparing EMG-triggered, cyclic, and sensory electrical stimulation

What the fuck is the protocol for this? Don;'t be a fucking lazy asshole and tell me it doesn't work, I can just wait for spontaneous recovery to occur. You don't need therapists at all in this case.
https://search.naric.com/research/rehab/redesign_record.cfm?search=2&type=all&criteria=J77948&phrase=no&rec=135941&article_source=Rehab&international=0&international_language=&international_location=
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair , Volume 30(10) , Pgs. 978-987.

NARIC Accession Number: J77948. What's this?
ISSN: 1545-9683.
Author(s): Wilson, Richard D.; Page, Stephen J.; Delahanty, Michael; Knutson, Jayme S.; Gunzler, Douglas D.; Sheffler, Lynne R.; Chae, John.
Publication Year: 2016.
Number of Pages: 10.
Abstract: Study compared the effect of cyclic neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES), electromyographically (EMG)-triggered NMES, and sensory stimulation on motor impairment and activity limitations in patients with upper-limb hemiplegia. This was a multicenter, balanced randomization, single-blind, multi-arm parallel-group study of non-hospitalized hemiplegic stroke survivors conducted at 3 medical centers. A total of 122 individuals within 6 months of stroke were randomized to receive either cyclic NMES, EMG-triggered NMES, or sensory stimulation twice every weekday in 40-minute sessions, over an 8 week-period. Outcomes assessments were completed at each site by a blinded occupational therapist at baseline, midtreatment, end of treatment, and 1, 3, and 6 months after completion of treatment. The primary outcome measure was the upper-extremity section of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA). A secondary outcome was the ability of a hemiparetic upper limb to execute specific activities, assessed with the modified Arm Motor Ability Test (mAMAT). There were significant increases in the FMA, FMA Wrist and Hand, and mAMAT for all 3 groups. There was no significant difference in the improvement among the treatment groups in the FMA, FMA Wrist and Hand, or the mAMAT. All groups exhibited significant improvement of impairment and functional limitation with electrical stimulation therapy applied within 6 months of stroke. Improvements were likely a result of spontaneous recovery. There was no difference based on the type of electrical stimulation that was administered.
Descriptor Terms: ELECTRICAL STIMULATION, HEMIPLEGIA, LIMBS, MOTOR SKILLS, OUTCOMES, STROKE.

Can this document be ordered through NARIC's document delivery service*?: Y.

Citation: Wilson, Richard D., Page, Stephen J., Delahanty, Michael, Knutson, Jayme S., Gunzler, Douglas D., Sheffler, Lynne R., Chae, John. (2016). Upper-limb recovery after stroke: A randomized controlled trial comparing EMG-triggered, cyclic, and sensory electrical stimulation. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair , 30(10), Pgs. 978-987. Retrieved 3/28/2018, from REHABDATA database.

* The majority of journal articles, books, and reports in our collection are only available by regular mail, rather than downloadable electronic format. Learn more about our digital collection and our document delivery service.

More information about this publication:
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair.