The influence of functional electrical stimulation on hand motor recovery in stroke patients: a review

Table 1 Overview over studies assessing cortical effects of FES

	Post stroke	Degree of impairment	Method	Outcome
Hara et al. 2013 [30]	> 1 year	FM: 24 (11 – 37); > 20° extension of the 3^rd finger	NIRS	ipsilesional SMC ↑
Shin et al. 2008* [33]	> 1 year	BBT: 21.14 ± 4.09; > 20° extension of the 3^rd finger	fMRI	contralesional SMC ↓
Sasaki et al. 2012 [32]	> 1 year	FM: 41.8 ± 5.08	fMRI	contralesional SMC ↓ (no statistics)
Page et al. 2010 [34]	> 6 month	FM: 23 (6 – 35); no active extension of fingers or wrist	fMRI	contralesional SMC ↑
Kimberley et al. 2004* [9]	> 6 month	> 10° extension of the 2^nd finger	fMRI	contralesional SMC ↑
Wei et al. 2013 [31]	2 – 6 weeks	FM: 30 (6-50); no active extension of fingers	fMRI	ipsilesional SMC ↓

Comparison of studies assessing the cortical effects of FES treatment in relationship to post stroke time point, degree of impairment and methods of evaluation. One can observe a trend towards severe impairment leading to activation of the contralesional site, whereas less impaired patients tend to recruit the ipsilesional site. Studies marked with an asterisk (*) are randomized controlled trials. FM = Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the upper extremity; BBT = Box and Block-Test; NIRS = Near-infrared spectroscopy; fMRI = functional magnetic resonance imaging; SMC = sensorimotor cortex.

ISSN: 2040-7378