Freeha Sharif1, Samina Ghulam1, Arshad Nawaz Malik2, Quratulain Saeed3. 1. Department of Physiotherapy, Armed Forces Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine (AFIRM), Rawalpindi. 2. Department of Rehabilitation, Riphah International University, Islamabad. 3. Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Foundation University, Islamabad.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of functional electrical stimulation (FES) versus conventional electrical stimulation in gait rehabilitation of patients with stroke for finding the most appropriate problem-oriented treatment for foot drop patients in a shorter time period. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY: Armed Forces Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Rawalpindi, from July to December 2016. METHODOLOGY:Subjects with foot drop due to stroke were allotted randomly into 1 of 2 groups receiving standard rehabilitation with Functional Electrical Stimulation (FES) or Electrical Muscle Stimulation (EMS). FES was applied on tibialis anterior 30 minutes/day, five days/week for six weeks. EMS was also applied on the tibialis anterior five days/week for six weeks. Outcome measures included Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale, Modified Ashworth Scale, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Time Up and Go Test (TUG) and Gait Dynamic Index (GDI). They were recorded at baseline, after 3 and 6 weeks. Pre- and post-treatment scores were analyzed between two groups on SPSS-20. RESULTS: After six weeks of intervention, significant improvement was recorded in Fugl-Meyer Assessment score (p<0.001), modified Ashworth Scale score (p=0.027), Berg Balance Scale score (p<0.001), Time Up and Go Test (p<0.001) and Gait Dynamic Index (p=0.012) of the group subjected to FES. CONCLUSION:Gait training with FES is more effective than EMS in improving mobility, balance, gait performance and reducing spasticity in stroke patients. The research will help clinicians to select appropriate treatment of foot drop in stroke patients.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of functional electrical stimulation (FES) versus conventional electrical stimulation in gait rehabilitation of patients with stroke for finding the most appropriate problem-oriented treatment for foot drop patients in a shorter time period. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY: Armed Forces Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Rawalpindi, from July to December 2016. METHODOLOGY: Subjects with foot drop due to stroke were allotted randomly into 1 of 2 groups receiving standard rehabilitation with Functional Electrical Stimulation (FES) or Electrical Muscle Stimulation (EMS). FES was applied on tibialis anterior 30 minutes/day, five days/week for six weeks. EMS was also applied on the tibialis anterior five days/week for six weeks. Outcome measures included Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale, Modified Ashworth Scale, Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Time Up and Go Test (TUG) and Gait Dynamic Index (GDI). They were recorded at baseline, after 3 and 6 weeks. Pre- and post-treatment scores were analyzed between two groups on SPSS-20. RESULTS: After six weeks of intervention, significant improvement was recorded in Fugl-Meyer Assessment score (p<0.001), modified Ashworth Scale score (p=0.027), Berg Balance Scale score (p<0.001), Time Up and Go Test (p<0.001) and Gait Dynamic Index (p=0.012) of the group subjected to FES. CONCLUSION: Gait training with FES is more effective than EMS in improving mobility, balance, gait performance and reducing spasticity in strokepatients. The research will help clinicians to select appropriate treatment of foot drop in strokepatients.