Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Multiple Sclerosis | Research

Long-term outcomes of semi-implantable functional electrical stimulation for central drop foot

Authors: Lars Buentjen, Andreas Kupsch, Imke Galazky, Roman Frantsev, Hans-Jochen Heinze, Jürgen Voges, Janet Hausmann, Catherine M. Sweeney-Reed

Published in: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Central drop foot is a common problem in patients with stroke or multiple sclerosis (MS). For decades, it has been treated with orthotic devices, keeping the ankle in a fixed position. It has been shown recently that semi-implantable functional electrical stimulation (siFES) of the peroneal nerve can lead to a greater gait velocity increase than orthotic devices immediately after being switched on. Little is known, however, about long-term outcomes over 12 months, and the relationship between quality of life (QoL) and gait speed using siFES has never been reported applying a validated tool. We provide here a report of short (3 months) and long-term (12 months) outcomes for gait speed and QoL.

Methods

Forty-five consecutive patients (91% chronic stroke, 9% MS) with central drop foot received siFES (Actigait®). A 10 m walking test was carried out on day 1 of stimulation (T1), in stimulation ON and OFF conditions, and repeated after 3 (T2) and 12 (T3) months. A 36-item Short Form questionnaire was applied at all three time points.

Results

We found a main effect of stimulation on both maximum (p < 0.001) and comfortable gait velocity (p < 0.001) and a main effect of time (p = 0.015) only on maximum gait velocity. There were no significant interactions. Mean maximum gait velocity across the three assessment time points was 0.13 m/s greater with stimulation ON than OFF, and mean comfortable gait velocity was 0.083 m/s faster with stimulation ON than OFF. The increase in maximum gait velocity over time was 0.096 m/s, with post hoc testing revealing a significant increase from T1 to T2 (p = 0.012), which was maintained but not significantly further increased at T3. QoL scores showed a main effect of time (p < 0.001), with post hoc testing revealing an increase from T1 to T2 (p < 0.001), which was maintained at T3 (p < 0.001). Finally, overall absolute QoL scores correlated with the absolute maximum and comfortable gait speeds at T2 and T3, and the increase in overall QoL scores correlated with the increase in comfortable gait velocity from T1 to T3. Pain was reduced at T2 (p < 0.001) and was independent of gait speed but correlated with overall QoL (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Peroneal siFES increased maximal and comfortable gait velocity and QoL, with the greatest increase in both over the first three months, which was maintained at one year, suggesting that 3 months is an adequate follow-up time. Pain after 3 months correlated with QoL and was independent of gait velocity, suggesting pain as an independent outcome measure in siFES for drop foot.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Berenpas F, et al. Kinematic and kinetic benefits of implantable peroneal nerve stimulation in people with post-stroke drop foot using an ankle-foot orthosis. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2018;36:547–58.PubMed Berenpas F, et al. Kinematic and kinetic benefits of implantable peroneal nerve stimulation in people with post-stroke drop foot using an ankle-foot orthosis. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2018;36:547–58.PubMed
2.
go back to reference Burridge J, et al. Phase II trial to evaluate the ActiGait implanted drop-foot stimulator in established hemiplegia. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39(3):212–8.CrossRef Burridge J, et al. Phase II trial to evaluate the ActiGait implanted drop-foot stimulator in established hemiplegia. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39(3):212–8.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Chen G, et al. Gait differences between individuals with post-stroke hemiparesis and non-disabled controls at matched speeds. Gait Posture. 2005;22:51–6.CrossRef Chen G, et al. Gait differences between individuals with post-stroke hemiparesis and non-disabled controls at matched speeds. Gait Posture. 2005;22:51–6.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Chuong H, Adcock L. Foot drop stimulators for foot drop: A review of clinical-, cost-effectiveness and guidelines. Ottawa: CADTH (CADTH rapid response report: summary with critical appraisal); 2018. p. 1–13. Chuong H, Adcock L. Foot drop stimulators for foot drop: A review of clinical-, cost-effectiveness and guidelines. Ottawa: CADTH (CADTH rapid response report: summary with critical appraisal); 2018. p. 1–13.
6.
go back to reference Ernst J, et al. Towards physiological ankle movements with the ActiGait implantable drop foot stimulator in chronic stroke. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2013;31(5):557–69.PubMed Ernst J, et al. Towards physiological ankle movements with the ActiGait implantable drop foot stimulator in chronic stroke. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2013;31(5):557–69.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Esnouf JE, et al. Impact on activities of daily living using a functional electrical stimulation device to improve dropped foot in people with multiple sclerosis, measured by the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Mult Scler. 2010;16(9):1141–7.CrossRef Esnouf JE, et al. Impact on activities of daily living using a functional electrical stimulation device to improve dropped foot in people with multiple sclerosis, measured by the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Mult Scler. 2010;16(9):1141–7.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Forster A, Young J. Incidence and consequences offalls due to stroke: a systematic inquiry. BMJ. 1995;11:83–6.CrossRef Forster A, Young J. Incidence and consequences offalls due to stroke: a systematic inquiry. BMJ. 1995;11:83–6.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Geddes LA. Accuracy limitations of chronaxie values. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2004;51(1):176–81.CrossRef Geddes LA. Accuracy limitations of chronaxie values. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2004;51(1):176–81.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM. The RAND 36-item health survey 1.0. Health Econ. 1993;2(3):217–27.CrossRef Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RM. The RAND 36-item health survey 1.0. Health Econ. 1993;2(3):217–27.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kottink, A. et al., 2004. Orthotic effect of functional electrical stimulation on the improvement of walking in stroke patients with foot drop: A systematic review. Artif Organs, 28(6), pp.577–586. Available at: http://www.cjebm.org.cn/Upload/PaperUpLoad/b911d552-049c-4895-80a5-f491da14b7cf.pdf%5Cnhttp://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=emed11&NEWS=N&AN=2013425148. Kottink, A. et al., 2004. Orthotic effect of functional electrical stimulation on the improvement of walking in stroke patients with foot drop: A systematic review. Artif Organs, 28(6), pp.577–586. Available at: http://​www.​cjebm.​org.​cn/​Upload/​PaperUpLoad/​b911d552-049c-4895-80a5-f491da14b7cf.​pdf%5Cnhttp://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=emed11&NEWS=N&AN=2013425148.
14.
go back to reference Kottink A, et al. Therapeutic effect of an implantable peroneal nerve stimulator in subjects with chronic stroke and footdrop. Physical Therapy. 2008;88(4):437–48.CrossRef Kottink A, et al. Therapeutic effect of an implantable peroneal nerve stimulator in subjects with chronic stroke and footdrop. Physical Therapy. 2008;88(4):437–48.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Lapicque L. Recherches quantitatives sur l’excitation électrique des nerfs traitée comme une polarisastio. Physiol Pathol Génér. 1907;9:620–35. Lapicque L. Recherches quantitatives sur l’excitation électrique des nerfs traitée comme une polarisastio. Physiol Pathol Génér. 1907;9:620–35.
16.
go back to reference Linden ML, Der V, et al. Habitual functional electrical stimulation therapy improves gait kinematics and walking performance, but not patient-reported functional outcomes, of people with multiple sclerosis who present with foot-drop. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e103368.CrossRef Linden ML, Der V, et al. Habitual functional electrical stimulation therapy improves gait kinematics and walking performance, but not patient-reported functional outcomes, of people with multiple sclerosis who present with foot-drop. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e103368.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Martin KD, et al. Restoration of ankle movements with the ActiGait implantable drop foot stimulator: a safe and reliable treatment option for permanent central leg palsy. J Neurosurg. 2016;124(1):70–6.CrossRef Martin KD, et al. Restoration of ankle movements with the ActiGait implantable drop foot stimulator: a safe and reliable treatment option for permanent central leg palsy. J Neurosurg. 2016;124(1):70–6.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Perera S, et al. Meaningful Change and Responsiveness in Common Physical Performance Measures in Older Adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006;54(5):743–9.CrossRef Perera S, et al. Meaningful Change and Responsiveness in Common Physical Performance Measures in Older Adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006;54(5):743–9.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Perry J, et al. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke. 1995;26(6):982–9.CrossRef Perry J, et al. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke. 1995;26(6):982–9.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Robbins SM, et al. The therapeutic effect of functional and transcutaneous electric stimulation on improving gait speed in stroke patients: a meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:853–9.CrossRef Robbins SM, et al. The therapeutic effect of functional and transcutaneous electric stimulation on improving gait speed in stroke patients: a meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:853–9.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Schiemanck S, et al. Effects of implantable peroneal nerve stimulation on gait quality, energy expenditure, participation and user satisfaction in patients with post-stroke drop foot using an ankle-foot orthosis. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2015;33:795–807.PubMed Schiemanck S, et al. Effects of implantable peroneal nerve stimulation on gait quality, energy expenditure, participation and user satisfaction in patients with post-stroke drop foot using an ankle-foot orthosis. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2015;33:795–807.PubMed
24.
go back to reference Schmid A, et al. Improvements in Speed-Based Gait Classifications Are Meaningful. Stroke. 2007;38(7):2096–100.CrossRef Schmid A, et al. Improvements in Speed-Based Gait Classifications Are Meaningful. Stroke. 2007;38(7):2096–100.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Stein RB, et al. Long-term therapeutic and orthotic effects of a foot drop stimulator on walking performance in progressive and nonprogressive neurological disorders. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(2):152–67.CrossRef Stein RB, et al. Long-term therapeutic and orthotic effects of a foot drop stimulator on walking performance in progressive and nonprogressive neurological disorders. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24(2):152–67.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Street T, Singleton C. Five-year follow-up of a longitudinal, cohort study of the effectiveness of, functional electrical stimulation for, people with multiple sclerosis. Int J MS Care. 2018;20(5):224–30.CrossRef Street T, Singleton C. Five-year follow-up of a longitudinal, cohort study of the effectiveness of, functional electrical stimulation for, people with multiple sclerosis. Int J MS Care. 2018;20(5):224–30.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Takebe K, et al. Peroneal nerve stimulator in rehabilitation of hemiplegic patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1975;56(6):237–9.PubMed Takebe K, et al. Peroneal nerve stimulator in rehabilitation of hemiplegic patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1975;56(6):237–9.PubMed
28.
go back to reference Taylor PN, et al. Correction of footdrop due to multiple sclerosis using the STIMuSTEP implanted dropped foot stimulator. Int J MS Care. 2016;18(5):239–47.CrossRef Taylor PN, et al. Correction of footdrop due to multiple sclerosis using the STIMuSTEP implanted dropped foot stimulator. Int J MS Care. 2016;18(5):239–47.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Thibaut A, Moissenet F, Di C. Brain plasticity after implanted peroneal nerve electrical stimulation to improve gait in chronic stroke patients: two case reports. NeuroRehabilitation. 2017;40:251–8.CrossRef Thibaut A, Moissenet F, Di C. Brain plasticity after implanted peroneal nerve electrical stimulation to improve gait in chronic stroke patients: two case reports. NeuroRehabilitation. 2017;40:251–8.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473–83.CrossRef Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473–83.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Weiss G. Sur la possibilité de rendre comparable entre eux les appareils servant à l’excitation électrique. Arch Ital Biol. 1901;35:413–46. Weiss G. Sur la possibilité de rendre comparable entre eux les appareils servant à l’excitation électrique. Arch Ital Biol. 1901;35:413–46.
Metadata
Title
Long-term outcomes of semi-implantable functional electrical stimulation for central drop foot
Authors
Lars Buentjen
Andreas Kupsch
Imke Galazky
Roman Frantsev
Hans-Jochen Heinze
Jürgen Voges
Janet Hausmann
Catherine M. Sweeney-Reed
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1743-0003
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-019-0542-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 1/2019 Go to the issue