OBJECTIVES: To test the efficacy and acceptance of a footdrop stimulator controlled by a tilt sensor. METHODS: A nonrandomized, test-retest study of 26 subjects with footdrop of more than 1 year's duration, resulting from various central nervous system disorders, was performed in 4 centers for at least 3 months. Speed of walking in a straight line, speed around a figure of 8, and physiological cost index (PCI) were measured with and without the device. Hours/day and steps/day using the device were recorded. RESULTS: All but 2 subjects used the tilt sensor at home, rather than a foot switch. Walking speed increased by 15% after 3 months (n = 26; P < 0.01), 32% after 6 months (n = 16; P < 0.01), and 47% after 12 months (n = 8; P < 0.05), while PCI decreased. The number of steps taken per day of use increased significantly over time, and increased speed was directly correlated with usage. Walking speed also increased with the stimulator off, but to a lesser extent, indicating a training effect. Subject feedback from a questionnaire indicated satisfaction with the stimulator. CONCLUSIONS: Both efficacy and acceptance of the stimulator were good in a population of subjects with chronic footdrop.
OBJECTIVES: To test the efficacy and acceptance of a footdrop stimulator controlled by a tilt sensor. METHODS: A nonrandomized, test-retest study of 26 subjects with footdrop of more than 1 year's duration, resulting from various central nervous system disorders, was performed in 4 centers for at least 3 months. Speed of walking in a straight line, speed around a figure of 8, and physiological cost index (PCI) were measured with and without the device. Hours/day and steps/day using the device were recorded. RESULTS: All but 2 subjects used the tilt sensor at home, rather than a foot switch. Walking speed increased by 15% after 3 months (n = 26; P < 0.01), 32% after 6 months (n = 16; P < 0.01), and 47% after 12 months (n = 8; P < 0.05), while PCI decreased. The number of steps taken per day of use increased significantly over time, and increased speed was directly correlated with usage. Walking speed also increased with the stimulator off, but to a lesser extent, indicating a training effect. Subject feedback from a questionnaire indicated satisfaction with the stimulator. CONCLUSIONS: Both efficacy and acceptance of the stimulator were good in a population of subjects with chronic footdrop.
Authors: Abbey Downing; David Van Ryn; Anne Fecko; Christopher Aiken; Sean McGowan; Sarah Sawers; Thomas McInerny; Katie Moore; Louis Passariello; Helen Rogers Journal: Int J MS Care Date: 2014
Authors: Trisha M Kesar; Ramu Perumal; Angela Jancosko; Darcy S Reisman; Katherine S Rudolph; Jill S Higginson; Stuart A Binder-Macleod Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2009-11-19
Authors: Jayme S Knutson; Kristine Hansen; Jennifer Nagy; Stephanie N Bailey; Douglas D Gunzler; Lynne R Sheffler; John Chae Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 2.159