Effects of FES-Ambulation Training on Locomotor Function and Health-Related Quality of Life in Individuals With Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The combination of body weight-supported gait training with functional electrical stimulation (FES) may provide the optimal stimulus for improving overground walking after spinal cord injury (SCI). This potential benefit is likely due to the combination of specificity with the maximization of muscle contractions. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of 12 weeks of FES-ambulation on overground walking and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in individuals with SCI. METHODS: Six individuals (60.5 ± 13.2 years) with SCI (C4-L3; AIS D; 9.3 ± 12.0 years post injury), completed a thrice-weekly, 12-week FES-ambulation training program. Locomotor function was assessed via the Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury II (WISCI II), the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), the 10-meter walk test (10MWT), and the body-weight support required during training. HRQOL was assessed via the Short Form-36, the Perceived Stress Scale, and the Center of Epidemiological Studies for Depression scale. RESULTS: Participants showed significant improvements in the 6MWT (223.6 ± 141.5 m to 297.3 ± 164.5 m; P = .03), the required body weight support (55.3% ± 12.6% to 14.7% ± 23.2%; P = .03), and a nonsignificant trend toward an increase in walking speed during the 10MWT (0.69 ± 0.4 m/s to 0.9 ± 0.5 m/s; P = .08) following the training program. Four participants showed improvements on the WISCI II (1-4 points). Participants also showed a decrease in the Short Form-36 pain score (6.5 ± 1.2 to 5.0 ± 1.7; P = .04) and an increase in the overall mental health score (47.8 ± 12.6 to 54.2 ± 6.7; P = .04). CONCLUSION: FES-ambulation was associated with enhanced overground walking in individuals with AIS D SCI, reduced pain, and improved mental health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".