The Effect of Electrical Stimulation on Impairment of the Painful Post-Stroke Shoulder
NCT ID: NCT03683901
Last Updated: 2019-09-16
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
10 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2010-12-27
2011-05-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Effectiveness of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation After Stroke
NCT03913624
Electrical Stimulation for Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain
NCT01123382
Comparison of Four-Channel Functional Electrical Stimulation vs. One-Channel Electrical Stimulation on Moderate Arm/Hand Paresis in Subacute Stroke Patients
NCT07098572
Electrical Stimulation for Recovery of Ankle Dorsiflexion in Chronic Stroke Survivors
NCT01029912
Effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Muscle Architecture and Functionality of Patients After Acute Stroke
NCT03840954
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NA
SINGLE_GROUP
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
TENS/t-NMES/No stimulation
TENS stimulation parameters were of a symmetric waveform, a frequency of 100 Hz, and a pulse duration of 300 microseconds (EMPI 300PVTM program PPR #7) applied for 10 seconds. t-NMES parameters were a symmetric waveform with 2 second ramp-up and 2 second ramp-down, a frequency of 35Hz, and a pulse duration of 300 microseconds (EMPI 300PVTM program PPR #3). The t-NMES current intensity was set by adjusting the amplitude to yield the strongest contraction of the underlying muscles without initiating pain. Device and electrodes remained in place but no stimulation was delivered over the 10 second interval. Exposed to each stimulation 3 times for each shoulder ROM.
TENS
Electrical Stimulation
t-NMES
Electrical Stimulation
No stimulation
No stimulation
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
TENS
Electrical Stimulation
t-NMES
Electrical Stimulation
No stimulation
No stimulation
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* worst shoulder pain in the last week at least 4 on the 0-10 numerical rating scale,
* adequate cognitive ability to be able to rate their pain in the past week
Exclusion Criteria
* uncontrolled seizures (defined as more than one per month)
* an implanted electrical device
* uncompensated hemi-neglect
21 Years
89 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
MetroHealth Medical Center
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
John Chae, MD
VP Research Instititute; Chair, Department of PM&R
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
John Chae, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
MetroHealth Medical Center
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Chantraine A, Baribeault A, Uebelhart D, Gremion G. Shoulder pain and dysfunction in hemiplegia: effects of functional electrical stimulation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999 Mar;80(3):328-31. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(99)90146-6.
Faghri PD, Rodgers MM, Glaser RM, Bors JG, Ho C, Akuthota P. The effects of functional electrical stimulation on shoulder subluxation, arm function recovery, and shoulder pain in hemiplegic stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994 Jan;75(1):73-9.
Leandri M, Parodi CI, Corrieri N, Rigardo S. Comparison of TENS treatments in hemiplegic shoulder pain. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1990;22(2):69-71.
Roosink M, Renzenbrink GJ, Buitenweg JR, van Dongen RT, Geurts AC, Ijzerman MJ. Somatosensory symptoms and signs and conditioned pain modulation in chronic post-stroke shoulder pain. J Pain. 2011 Apr;12(4):476-85. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2010.10.009. Epub 2010 Dec 17.
Sluka KA, Deacon M, Stibal A, Strissel S, Terpstra A. Spinal blockade of opioid receptors prevents the analgesia produced by TENS in arthritic rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1999 May;289(2):840-6.
Soo Hoo J, Paul T, Chae J, Wilson RD. Central hypersensitivity in chronic hemiplegic shoulder pain. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Jan;92(1):1-9; quiz 10-3. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31827df862.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IRB10-00491
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.