OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in patients with stroke through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically. Randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation vs placebo transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on stroke were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcome was modified Ashworth scale (MAS). Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation supplementation significantly reduced MAS (standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.71; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = -1.11 to -0.30; p = 0.0006), improved static balance with open eyes (SMD = -1.26; 95% CI = -1.83 to -0.69; p<0.0001) and closed eyes (SMD = -1.74; 95% CI = -2.36 to -1.12; p < 0.00001), and increased walking speed (SMD = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.84; p = 0.03), but did not improve results on the Timed Up and Go Test (SMD = -0.60; 95% CI=-1.22 to 0.03; p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is associated with significantly reduced spasticity, increased static balance and walking speed, but has no influence on dynamic balance.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in patients with stroke through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically. Randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation vs placebo transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on stroke were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcome was modified Ashworth scale (MAS). Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation supplementation significantly reduced MAS (standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.71; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = -1.11 to -0.30; p = 0.0006), improved static balance with open eyes (SMD = -1.26; 95% CI = -1.83 to -0.69; p<0.0001) and closed eyes (SMD = -1.74; 95% CI = -2.36 to -1.12; p < 0.00001), and increased walking speed (SMD = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.84; p = 0.03), but did not improve results on the Timed Up and Go Test (SMD = -0.60; 95% CI=-1.22 to 0.03; p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is associated with significantly reduced spasticity, increased static balance and walking speed, but has no influence on dynamic balance.
Authors: Tiev Miller; Ling Qin; Vivian W Y Hung; Michael T C Ying; Charlotte S L Tsang; Huixi Ouyang; Raymond C K Chung; Marco Y C Pang Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2021-10-12 Impact factor: 4.507