{"title":"High-vs medium-frequency neuromuscular electrical stimulation protocols on muscle mass in Intensive Care Unit patients, a pilot study","authors":"Christos Georgopoulos, Aikaterini Katsogianni, Eirini Patsaki, Georgios Sidiras, Ioannis Vasileiadis, Eleni Magira, Serafim Nanas, Lefteris Karatzanos","doi":"10.12681/healthresj.34252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The aim of the present study was to investigate whether a high-frequency (HF) neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) protocol could result in a smaller loss of muscle mass than a moderate-frequency (MF) protocol in ICU patients. Methods and materials: In this randomized pilot control trial, patients of the two intervention groups followed daily NMES sessions from the day of ICU admission until the tenth day. All study groups received physiotherapy in terms of usual care. Muscle layer thickness was assessed with ultrasound in the vastusintermedius (VI) and rectus femoris (RF) muscle to evaluate changes in muscle mass. Results: Totally 58 patients were allocated into three groups and 29 were finally analyzed (control: 10, MF: 12, HF: 7). Significant differences (p=0.05) between control and pooled NMES groups were observed for the right RF and VI. Significant differences in favor of HF vs MF group were observed for the left RF (3.6±15.3 vs 7.2±7.9% respectively, p=0.04). No differences were found regarding the number of sessions and presence of oedema (p>0.05), while strength of contraction during sessions tended to be somewhat higher in the HF (p=0.09). Conclusion: HF may be more effective than MF to prevent muscle mass loss in ICU patients. More studies are needed to determine the optimal NMES characteristics.","PeriodicalId":74991,"journal":{"name":"The East African health research journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The East African health research journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12681/healthresj.34252","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the present study was to investigate whether a high-frequency (HF) neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) protocol could result in a smaller loss of muscle mass than a moderate-frequency (MF) protocol in ICU patients. Methods and materials: In this randomized pilot control trial, patients of the two intervention groups followed daily NMES sessions from the day of ICU admission until the tenth day. All study groups received physiotherapy in terms of usual care. Muscle layer thickness was assessed with ultrasound in the vastusintermedius (VI) and rectus femoris (RF) muscle to evaluate changes in muscle mass. Results: Totally 58 patients were allocated into three groups and 29 were finally analyzed (control: 10, MF: 12, HF: 7). Significant differences (p=0.05) between control and pooled NMES groups were observed for the right RF and VI. Significant differences in favor of HF vs MF group were observed for the left RF (3.6±15.3 vs 7.2±7.9% respectively, p=0.04). No differences were found regarding the number of sessions and presence of oedema (p>0.05), while strength of contraction during sessions tended to be somewhat higher in the HF (p=0.09). Conclusion: HF may be more effective than MF to prevent muscle mass loss in ICU patients. More studies are needed to determine the optimal NMES characteristics.
目的:本研究的目的是探讨高频(HF)神经肌肉电刺激(NMES)方案是否比中频(MF)方案在ICU患者中导致更小的肌肉质量损失。方法和材料:在这项随机先导对照试验中,两个干预组的患者从ICU入院之日起至第10天每天进行NMES治疗。所有研究组在常规护理方面均接受物理治疗。用超声评估股中间肌(VI)和股直肌(RF)肌肉层厚度,以评估肌肉质量的变化。结果:58例患者分为3组,最终分析29例(对照组:10例,MF组:12例,HF组:7例),右侧RF和VI在对照组与合并NMES组之间差异有统计学意义(p=0.05),左侧RF在HF组与合并NMES组之间差异有统计学意义(分别为3.6±15.3 vs 7.2±7.9%,p=0.04)。在会话次数和水肿的存在方面没有发现差异(p>0.05),而在会话期间心力衰竭的收缩强度往往略高(p=0.09)。结论:HF可能比MF更有效地预防ICU患者的肌肉质量损失。需要更多的研究来确定最佳的NMES特性。