SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sheffler, L. R.
Right arrow Articles by Chae, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sheffler, L. R.
Right arrow Articles by Chae, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Peroneal Nerve Stimulation versus an Ankle Foot Orthosis for Correction of Footdrop in Stroke: Impact on Functional Ambulation

Lynne R. Sheffler, MD

Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, Cleveland Functional Electrical Stimulation Center, Cleveland, OH.

Maureen T. Hennessey, PT

Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, Cleveland Functional Electrical Stimulation Center, Cleveland, OH.

Gregory G. Naples, MS

Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, Cleveland Functional Electrical Stimulation Center, Cleveland, OH.

John Chae, MD

Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, Cleveland Functional Electrical Stimulation Center, Cleveland, OH, JChae{at}metrohealth.org

Objective. To compare the efficacy of the Odstock Dropped-Foot Stimulator (ODFS), a transcutaneous peroneal nerve stimulation device, versus an ankle foot orthosis (AFO) in improving functional ambulation of chronic stroke survivors. Intervention. Fourteen chronic stroke survivors with foot-drop participated in the study. Participants received ambulation training under 3 test conditions: 1) ODFS, 2) customized AFO, and 3) no device. Each participant was evaluated using the modified Emory Functional Ambulation Profile under the 3 test conditions. All participants were evaluated with a post-evaluation survey to solicit device feedback and preferences. Results. Functional ambulation with the AFO was significantly improved, relative to no device, on the floor (P = 0.000), carpet (P = 0.013), and "up and go" test (P = 0.042). There was a trend toward significance on the obstacle (P = 0.092) and stair (P = 0.067) trials. Functional ambulation with the ODFS was significantly improved, relative to no device, on the carpet(P = 0.004). A trend toward significance on floor (P = 0.081), obstaclxze (P = 0.092), and stair (P = 0.079) trials was observed. The difference in functional ambulation between the AFO and ODFS showed a trend toward statistical significance on floor (P = 0.065) and up and go (P = 0.082) trials only. Given a choice between the ODFS and AFO for long-term correction of footdrop, participants indicated a preference for the ODFS. Conclusion. The AFO and the ODFS may be comparable in their effect on improving functional ambulation as compared to no device. Specific characteristics of the ODFS may make it a preferred intervention by stroke survivors. More rigorously controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Key Words: Electrical stimulation • Peroneal nerve stimulation • Ankle foot orthosis • Hemiparesis • Footdrop.

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, Vol. 20, No. 3, 355-360 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1545968306287925


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
L. R. Sheffler, M. T. Hennessey, G. G. Naples, and J. Chae
Improvement in Functional Ambulation as a Therapeutic Effect of Peroneal Nerve Stimulation in Hemiplegia: Two Case Reports
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, July 1, 2007; 21(4): 366 - 369.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Advertisement