Low-frequency rectangular pulse is superior to middle frequency alternating current stimulation in cycling of people with spinal cord injury

Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Mar;88(3):338-45. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.12.026.

Abstract

Objective: To determine the efficacy of using modulated middle frequency alternating current (MFAC) muscle stimulation for functional electric stimulation-propelled cycling by people with spinal cord injury (SCI) compared with the conventional method of using standard low-frequency rectangular pulses (LFRP).

Design: Repeated-measures.

Setting: Laboratory setting.

Participants: Eleven otherwise healthy volunteer subjects with SCI (8 with American Spinal Injury Association [ASIA] grade A, 3 with ASIA grade B).

Interventions: To evaluate cycling-relevant differences between LFRP and modulated MFAC stimulation, we exposed participants to isometric measurements and cycling experiments performed during both 20 Hz LFRP and 4 KHz modulated with 50 Hz MFAC.

Main outcome measures: We recorded maximal isometric torque, maximal dynamic work during 20 minutes of ergometer cycling, and perceived discomfort for each of the 2 stimulation patterns.

Results: Both the isometric torque (P<.02) and work generated (P<.001) during MFAC stimulation were significantly lower than during standard LFRP stimulation. Four participants reported discomfort and 1 of them also developed skin burns during MFAC stimulation.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that in SCI subjects, stimulated cycling with low frequency is generally more effective than cycling with modulated MFAC in terms of torque, work, and pain sensation.

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Bicycling / physiology*
  • Electric Stimulation Therapy / methods*
  • Ergometry*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Isometric Contraction / physiology
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Muscle Fatigue / physiology
  • Muscle, Skeletal / physiopathology*
  • Pain Measurement
  • Spinal Cord Injuries / physiopathology
  • Spinal Cord Injuries / rehabilitation*
  • Torque