OBJECTIVE: To determine the neuroprosthetic effect of a peroneal nerve stimulator on tasks of functional ambulation in multiple sclerosis (MS). DESIGN: A single point-in-time assessment of functional ambulation tasks under the conditions of no device and peroneal nerve stimulator. SETTING: Outpatient academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=11) with diagnosis of MS (>6mo), dorsiflexion weakness, and prior usage of an ankle-foot orthosis. INTERVENTION: Surface peroneal nerve stimulator for ambulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Timed 25-foot Walk portion of the MS Functional Composite; Floor, Carpet, Up and Go, Obstacle, and Stair components of the Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile. RESULTS: Peroneal nerve stimulator-Stair performance was significantly enhanced (P=.05) versus no device, and statistical significance was approached for peroneal nerve stimulator-Obstacles (P=.09) versus no device. There were no significant differences between peroneal nerve stimulator and no device conditions in the remaining outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: The neuroprosthetic effect of the peroneal nerve stimulator is modest relative to no device in the performance of specific functional tasks of ambulation in MS gait. A longitudinal, controlled trial is needed to show effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the neuroprosthetic effect of a peroneal nerve stimulator on tasks of functional ambulation in multiple sclerosis (MS). DESIGN: A single point-in-time assessment of functional ambulation tasks under the conditions of no device and peroneal nerve stimulator. SETTING:Outpatient academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Participants (N=11) with diagnosis of MS (>6mo), dorsiflexion weakness, and prior usage of an ankle-foot orthosis. INTERVENTION: Surface peroneal nerve stimulator for ambulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Timed 25-foot Walk portion of the MS Functional Composite; Floor, Carpet, Up and Go, Obstacle, and Stair components of the Modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile. RESULTS: Peroneal nerve stimulator-Stair performance was significantly enhanced (P=.05) versus no device, and statistical significance was approached for peroneal nerve stimulator-Obstacles (P=.09) versus no device. There were no significant differences between peroneal nerve stimulator and no device conditions in the remaining outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: The neuroprosthetic effect of the peroneal nerve stimulator is modest relative to no device in the performance of specific functional tasks of ambulation in MS gait. A longitudinal, controlled trial is needed to show effectiveness.
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: Luciana A Mendes; Illia Ndf Lima; Tulio Souza; George C do Nascimento; Vanessa R Resqueti; Guilherme Af Fregonezi Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-01-14
Authors: Marietta L van der Linden; Julie E Hooper; Paula Cowan; Belinda B Weller; Thomas H Mercer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-08-18 Impact factor: 3.240