↓ Skip to main content

The influence of surface EMG-triggered multichannel electrical stimulation on sensomotoric recovery in patients with lumbar disc herniation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RECO)

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
222 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The influence of surface EMG-triggered multichannel electrical stimulation on sensomotoric recovery in patients with lumbar disc herniation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RECO)
Published in
Trials, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2310-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sara Lener, Christoph Wipplinger, Sebastian Hartmann, Wolfgang N. Löscher, Sabrina Neururer, Matthias Wildauer, Claudius Thomé, Anja Tschugg

Abstract

Intervertebral disc degeneration is one of the most common reasons for chronic low back pain and sensomotoric deficits, often treated by lumbar sequestrectomy. Nevertheless, the prognostic factors relevant for time and quality of recovery, of the surgical procedure, relative to conservative treatment, remain controversial and require further investigation. Surface electrical stimulation (SES) may be an influential intervention, already showing positive impact on motor and sensory recovery in different patient groups. Since mechanisms of SES still remain unclear, further inquiry is needed. This is a prospective, monocentric, randomized, controlled clinical trial. A total of 80 adult patients suffering from a lumbar disc herniation (LDH; 40 treated surgically, 40 conservatively) are allocated in a ratio of 1:1. Patients in the treatment group will receive surface electromyography (EMG)-triggered electrical stimulation for eight weeks, whereas patients in the control group will not obtain any additional treatment. The primary outcome parameter is defined as the cold detection threshold (CDT), determined by quantitative sensory testing (QST), 24 months after intervention. Secondary outcome parameters include the inquiry of sensory nerve function by two-point discrimination and QST, the assessment of motor nerve function by manual muscle testing, and validated scales and scores. These include: the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) assessing the domains pain, back-specific function, work disability, and patient satisfaction; the EQ-5D investigating the patient's generic health status; the painDETECT questionnaire (PD-Q) to identify neuropathic pain components; and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) to assess severity of depression. Moreover, neurological status, pain medication usage, and blood samples (CRP, TNFα, IL-1β, IL-6) will be evaluated. Study data generation (study site) and data storage, processing, and statistical analysis are clearly separated. The results of the RECO study will detect the effect of EMG-triggered multichannel SES on the improvement of mechanical and thermal sensitivity and the effect on motor recovery and pain, associated with clinical and laboratory parameters. Furthermore, data comparing surgical and conservative treatment can be collected. This will hopefully allow treatment recommendations for patients with LDH accompanied by a sensomotoric deficit. ISRCTN, ISRCTN12741173 . Registered on 15 January 2017.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 222 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 222 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 19%
Student > Bachelor 31 14%
Researcher 22 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 8%
Other 9 4%
Other 27 12%
Unknown 74 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 46 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 40 18%
Neuroscience 9 4%
Sports and Recreations 9 4%
Psychology 8 4%
Other 22 10%
Unknown 88 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2017.
All research outputs
#23,320,957
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,757
of 1,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#389,979
of 450,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,868 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them