Skip to main content

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Neurol.
Sec. Neurorehabilitation
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1403594

The effect of electrical stimulation in critical patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Provisionally accepted
Lili Li Lili Li 1,2Fei Li Fei Li 2*Xinyin Zhang Xinyin Zhang 2*Yuying Song Yuying Song 2*Shuyan Li Shuyan Li 2*Huiping Yao Huiping Yao 2*
  • 1 Other, 杭州市, China
  • 2 Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Objectives: While electrical stimulation has been demonstrated to improve medical research council (MRC) scores in critically ill patients, its effectiveness remains a subject of debate. This meta-analysis aimed to discuss recent insights into the effectiveness of electrical stimulation in improving muscle strength and its effects on different clinical outcomes in critically ill adults.Methods: A comprehensive search of major electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase, was conducted from inception to June 15, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of electrical stimulation in critically ill patients. The analysis focused on comparing electrical stimulation to standard care, sham interventions, or placebo. Outcomes of interest included MRC scores, duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), mortality rate, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS).Results: A total of 23 RCTs, including 1798 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The findings demonstrated a significant benefit of electrical stimulation over usual care in enhancing global muscle strength, as measured by MRC scores (MD =3.62, 95% CI 0.94 to 6.30, P=0.0008, I 2 =87%). While subgroup analysis of electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) demonstrated no significant effect on ICU LOS, sensitivity analysis indicated a potential reduction in ICU LOS for both EMS (MD=-11.0, 95% CI -21.12 to -0.88, P=0.03) and electrical stimulation overall (MD=-1.02, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.08, P=0.03) compared to the control group. In addition, sensitivity analysis suggested that both electrical stimulation (MD=-2.38, 95% CI -3.81 to -0.94, P=0.001) and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) specifically (MD=-2.36, 95% CI -3.85 to -0.88, P=0.002) may contribute to a decrease in hospital LOS. No statistically significant differences were observed in mortality or duration of MV.Electrical stimulation appears to be an effective intervention for improving MRC scores in critically ill patients.However, further research is warranted to explain the potential effects of electrical stimulation on hospital LOS and ICU LOS.

    Keywords: Electrical Stimulation, ICU, Meta-analysis, Physical Therapy, randomized controlled trial

    Received: 07 Apr 2024; Accepted: 12 Jul 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Li, Li, Zhang, Song, Li and Yao. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Fei Li, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang Province, China
    Xinyin Zhang, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang Province, China
    Yuying Song, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang Province, China
    Shuyan Li, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang Province, China
    Huiping Yao, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Hangzhou, 310014, Zhejiang Province, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.