↓ Skip to main content

Using tDCS as an Add-On Treatment Prior to FES Therapy in Improving Upper Limb Function in Severe Chronic Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
Using tDCS as an Add-On Treatment Prior to FES Therapy in Improving Upper Limb Function in Severe Chronic Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nuerjiayi Shaheiwola, Bin Zhang, Jie Jia, Dingguo Zhang

Abstract

Background: Upper limb function recovery is of vital importance for stroke patients. However, it is difficult to get ideal recovery, especially for patients with severe chronic stroke. As the first randomized controlled long-term trial combining bilateral transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and functional electrical stimulation (FES) therapy, this study examined the efficacy of a novel protocol that included applying tDCS as an add-on treatment prior to FES therapy over the course of a 4-week program. Methods: Thirty subjects with severe chronic stroke were randomized to either Group A (active tDCS+FES) (N = 15) or Group B (sham tDCS+FES) (N = 15). Five assessments including 3 behavioral outcome measurement scales [the Fugl-Meyer scale (cFMA), the Wolf motor function test (WMFT) and the modified Ashworth scale (MAS)], the surface electromyography (sEMG) evaluation and the transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) assessment were performed to evaluate subjects before and after the overall therapy. Results: In Group A, the combined protocol was well tolerated by all patients and induced significant improvements in upper extremity motor abilities in terms of the assessments of cFMA [t(14) = -5.658, p < 0.05], WMFT [t(14) = -3.746, p < 0.05], MAS [t(14) = 5.236, p < 0.05], sEMG and TMS. The results of between-group comparisons showed there was a significant difference between Group A and Group B in terms of the assessments of cFMA [t(28) = 2.223, p < 0.05], WMFT [t(28) = -2.152, p < 0.05] and sEMG [F(1, 196) = 0.918, p < 0.05]. Conclusion: The proposed protocol can facilitate improvements in upper extremity motor abilities in severe chronic stroke patients and is more beneficial than the protocol with FES therapy alone. Our results showed efficacy of the new paradigm with combined intervention in both the central nervous system and the peripheral nervous system. ChiCTR-ICR-15006108.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Researcher 8 8%
Professor 4 4%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 35 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 13%
Neuroscience 13 13%
Engineering 7 7%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 40 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,273,766
of 23,318,744 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#4,357
of 7,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,482
of 328,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#93
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,318,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 328,688 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.