Back in 2006, an invited commentary raised the question “are we asking clinically relevant questions”? The commentary referenced an application of electrical stimulation in a clinical trial [1]. This question regarding Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) and Functional Electrical Stimulation (FES) is as relevant in 2020. Based on the premise and presumption that the aim of applying NMES/FES is to enable each patient achieve the most effective and efficient recovery of functional independence, one must wonder if we are asking the most critical, yet clinically relevant questions? This perspective focuses on locomotion and upper extremity function following a Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA) and non-neurological damage to the knee joint. It delineates several questions elaborating on the issue of meaningful outcomes to the patients versus the focus of clinician and researchers on measurable outcomes. It offers pathways that should hopefully lead to considerably more effective and efficient utilization of NMES and FES in rehabilitation medicine.
Keywords:
Published on: Aug 29, 2020 Pages: 45-48
Full Text PDF
Full Text HTML
DOI: 10.17352/2455-5487.000078
CrossMark
Publons
Harvard Library HOLLIS
Search IT
Semantic Scholar
Get Citation
Base Search
Scilit
OAI-PMH
ResearchGate
Academic Microsoft
GrowKudos
Universite de Paris
UW Libraries
SJSU King Library
SJSU King Library
NUS Library
McGill
DET KGL BIBLiOTEK
JCU Discovery
Universidad De Lima
WorldCat
VU on WorldCat
PTZ: We're glad you're here. Please click "create a new query" if you are a new visitor to our website and need further information from us.
If you are already a member of our network and need to keep track of any developments regarding a question you have already submitted, click "take me to my Query."