Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation combined with robotic-assisted body weight-supported treadmill training enhances motor score and gait recovery in incomplete spinal cord injury: a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial.

IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2025-01-30 DOI:10.1186/s12984-025-01545-8
Natalia Comino-Suárez, Juan C Moreno, Álvaro Megía-García, Antonio J Del-Ama, Diego Serrano-Muñoz, Juan Avendaño-Coy, Ángel Gil-Agudo, Mónica Alcobendas-Maestro, Esther López-López, Julio Gómez-Soriano
{"title":"Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation combined with robotic-assisted body weight-supported treadmill training enhances motor score and gait recovery in incomplete spinal cord injury: a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial.","authors":"Natalia Comino-Suárez, Juan C Moreno, Álvaro Megía-García, Antonio J Del-Ama, Diego Serrano-Muñoz, Juan Avendaño-Coy, Ángel Gil-Agudo, Mónica Alcobendas-Maestro, Esther López-López, Julio Gómez-Soriano","doi":"10.1186/s12984-025-01545-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) has been suggested as a safe and feasible intervention for gait rehabilitation, no studies have determined its effectiveness compared to sham stimulation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the effectiveness of tSCS combined with robotic-assisted gait training (RAGT) on lower limb muscle strength and walking function in incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial was conducted. Twenty-seven subacute iSCI participants were randomly allocated to tSCS or sham-tSCS group. All subjects conducted a standard Lokomat walking training program of 40 sessions (5 familiarization sessions, followed by 20 sessions combined with active or sham tSCS, and finally the last 15 sessions with standard Lokomat). Primary outcomes were the lower extremity motor score (LEMS) and dynamometry. Secondary outcomes included the 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT), the Timed Up and Go test (TUG), the 6-Minute Walk test (6MWT), the Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (SCIM III) and the Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury II (WISCI-II). Motor evoked potential (MEP) induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) were also assessed for lower limb muscles. Assessments were performed before and after tSCS intervention and after 3-weeks follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Although no significant differences between groups were detected after the intervention, the tSCS group showed greater effects than the sham-tSCS group for LEMS (3.4 points; p = 0.033), 10MWT (37.5 s; p = 0.030), TUG (47.7 s; p = 0.009), and WISCI-II (3.4 points; p = 0.023) at the 1-month follow-up compared to baseline. Furthermore, the percentage of subjects who were able to walk 10 m at the follow-up was greater in the tSCS group (85.7%) compared to the sham group (43.1%; p = 0.029). Finally, a significant difference (p = 0.049) was observed in the comparison of the effects in the amplitude of the rectus femoris MEPs of tSCS group (- 0.97 mV) and the sham group (- 3.39 mV) at follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The outcomes of this study suggest that the combination of standard Lokomat training with tSCS for 20 sessions was effective for LEMS and gait recovery in subacute iSCI participants after 1 month of follow-up. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05210166).</p>","PeriodicalId":16384,"journal":{"name":"Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation","volume":"22 1","pages":"15"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11780808/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-025-01545-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) has been suggested as a safe and feasible intervention for gait rehabilitation, no studies have determined its effectiveness compared to sham stimulation.

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of tSCS combined with robotic-assisted gait training (RAGT) on lower limb muscle strength and walking function in incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) participants.

Methods: A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial was conducted. Twenty-seven subacute iSCI participants were randomly allocated to tSCS or sham-tSCS group. All subjects conducted a standard Lokomat walking training program of 40 sessions (5 familiarization sessions, followed by 20 sessions combined with active or sham tSCS, and finally the last 15 sessions with standard Lokomat). Primary outcomes were the lower extremity motor score (LEMS) and dynamometry. Secondary outcomes included the 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT), the Timed Up and Go test (TUG), the 6-Minute Walk test (6MWT), the Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (SCIM III) and the Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury II (WISCI-II). Motor evoked potential (MEP) induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) were also assessed for lower limb muscles. Assessments were performed before and after tSCS intervention and after 3-weeks follow-up.

Results: Although no significant differences between groups were detected after the intervention, the tSCS group showed greater effects than the sham-tSCS group for LEMS (3.4 points; p = 0.033), 10MWT (37.5 s; p = 0.030), TUG (47.7 s; p = 0.009), and WISCI-II (3.4 points; p = 0.023) at the 1-month follow-up compared to baseline. Furthermore, the percentage of subjects who were able to walk 10 m at the follow-up was greater in the tSCS group (85.7%) compared to the sham group (43.1%; p = 0.029). Finally, a significant difference (p = 0.049) was observed in the comparison of the effects in the amplitude of the rectus femoris MEPs of tSCS group (- 0.97 mV) and the sham group (- 3.39 mV) at follow-up.

Conclusions: The outcomes of this study suggest that the combination of standard Lokomat training with tSCS for 20 sessions was effective for LEMS and gait recovery in subacute iSCI participants after 1 month of follow-up. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05210166).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 工程技术-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
3.90%
发文量
122
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation considers manuscripts on all aspects of research that result from cross-fertilization of the fields of neuroscience, biomedical engineering, and physical medicine & rehabilitation.
期刊最新文献
Sway frequencies may predict postural instability in Parkinson's disease: a novel convolutional neural network approach. Lower limb pointing to assess intersegmental dynamics after incomplete spinal cord injury and the associated role of proprioceptive impairments. Correction: Selective nociceptive modulation using a novel prototype of transcutaneous kilohertz high-frequency alternating current stimulation: a crossover double-blind randomized sham-controlled trial. The impact of neck pain and movement performance on the interarticular compressive force of the cervical spine: a cross-sectional study based on OpenSim. Touchscreen-based assessment of upper limb kinematics after stroke: Reliability, validity and sensitivity to motor impairment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1