Functional Electrical Stimulation vs Transcutaneous Stimulation in Patients With Subacute Spinal Cord Injury
Comparison of Traditional Functional Electrical Stimulation to Transcutaneous Stimulation on Upper Extremity Outcomes in Patients With Subacute Spinal Cord Injury
Cervical spinal cord injuries (SCI) are the most common form of spinal cord injuries within the veteran population. Losing arm function is a major concern with these injuries. Doctors often use a treatment called functional electrical stimulation (FES) during rehab sessions targeted at improving arm and hand function. For FES, clinicians places sticky pads on the skin over the muscles that need to move. A newer treatment, called transcutaneous spinal stimulation (TSS), places the pads on the skin over the spine instead. This study compares the two treatments in veterans with non-traumatic spinal cord injuries while they are in the hospital's rehab program. The main goal is to see how well each treatment improves arm and hand function, which is measured with the Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test. If TSS works well, it could help veterans regain more arm and hand function which may result in increased independence.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Cervical spinal cord injuries (SCI) are the most prevalent form of spinal cord injuries within the veteran population. Cervical spinal cord injuries can result in functional limitations to both the lower and upper extremities. Among cervical SCI patients, addressing loss of function in the upper extremities is an extremely important issue to address. Current strategies to treat cervical spinal cord injuries during sub-acute rehabilitation incorporate functional electrical stimulation (FES), with electrodes placed on the skin directly over the targeted muscle groups. With this study current standard care FES will be compared with a new type of muscle stimulation - transcutaneous spinal stimulation (TSS) using the ExaStim® Stimulation System - where electrodes are placed on the skin over the spine. This study is a randomized controlled trial comparing the experimental use of TSS vs FES/standard care among veterans with non-traumatic spinal cord injury during their inpatient sub-acute stay. Outcome evaluations include physical outcome measures and patient-reported outcomes. The primary outcome measure is the Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test. Data will be collected by staff who are blinded to participants' group assignment. This study will provide evidence on the potential benefits of a promising new rehabilitation treatment modality - TSS - for supporting veterans with cervical SCI in achieving optimal outcomes in function and independence.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Katherine Metcalf
- Phone Number: 612-467-3538
- Email: Katherine.Metcalf@va.gov
Study Locations
-
-
Minnesota
-
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States, 55417
- Recruiting
- Minneapolis VA Health Care Systems
-
Principal Investigator:
- John M Looft, PhD
-
Contact:
- Jennifer L Robb, PhD
- Phone Number: (763) 346-9826
- Email: Jennifer.Robb2@va.gov
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
-
• Veterans admitted to the Minneapolis VA Health Care System's (MVAHCS) SCI inpatient unit for sub-acute rehabilitation following non-traumatic cervical SCI.
- Veterans are eligible for enrollment within 90 days of the onset of their spinal cord injury.
- Non-traumatic SCI, level T2 or above; AIS A,B,C,D.
- Age 18+.
Exclusion Criteria:
-
• Study clinicians determine that the veteran would likely not benefit from FES.
- Open wounds where electrodes would be placed.
- Cognitive impairments identified during the consent process indicating a veteran's Inability to comprehend essential information about the study.
- Contraindications to electrical stimulation (pacemaker, defibrillator, pregnancy, active tissue infection in area of stimulation).
- Active implanted medical device for electrical stimulation.
- Other internal metallic objects of unknown or foreign origin (unidentifiable surgical implants, shrapnel, bullet fragments, etc.)
- Acute medical conditions under active treatment that would contraindicate standard rehabilitation." History of a non-SCID related neurological condition (stroke, brain injury, etc.) impacting upper extremity.
- Uncontrolled, severe autonomic dysreflexia.
- Need for ventilator support.
- Inability to participate in therapy session >60 minutes.
- Botulinum toxin injections to the upper limb in prior 3 months.
- BMI > 40.0 (morbid obesity).
- Allergy to hydrogel, silicone, latex or other product materials.
- Uncontrolled cardiopulmonary disease.
- Uncontrolled epilepsy or seizures.
- Unmanaged depression, psychiatric disorders or ongoing substance abuse.
- Participation in another clinical trial that may interfere with this study.
- Pregnancy is contra-indicated for both TSS and FES. Women of childbearing years will be excluded as the enrollment timeline won't allow time for pregnancy testing.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Functional electrical stimulation
RTI Xcite |
Functional electrical stimulation |
|
Experimental: Transcutaneous spinal stimulation
ExaStim |
Transcutaneous spinal stimulation |
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test (CUE-T)
Time Frame: Baseline, 4-week, 8-week
|
A performance measure focused on quantifying upper limb limitations and impairment. The CUE-T assesses 17-19 tasks including reaching, lifting (up to 2kg), wheelchair push up, dynamometer strength testing, and active range of motion. Scoring is scored from 0 (unable) to 4 (no difficulty) with high scores indicating better upper limb function. This measure will be completed by a study staff (licensed physical or occupational therapist) who is blinded to treatment allocation. This instrument typically requires 15-30 minutes to complete. CUE-T evaluation sessions will be video-recorded so that observations of participant activities can be validated for study purposes. These video recordings will be destroyed as soon as the CUE-T assessment score has been finalized (within 2 weeks of completing the CUE-T.) |
Baseline, 4-week, 8-week
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Upper Extremity Motor Score UEMS
Time Frame: Baseline, 8-weeks
|
The UEMS is an upper limb strength assessment of upper limb muscles stratified by spinal nerve level innervation, using traditional manual muscle testing scoring (0-5/5). This requires the participant to demonstrate available movement against gravity, then if full movement is available that motion could be tested against resistance of the tester. If unable to move against gravity the muscles would be tested in gravity eliminated position (ie., horizontal plane) for active range of motion for full/partial range or palpable activity of the targeted muscle group. These tests are consistent with clinical practice to assess spinal cord injury level. This subscale may be performed by the blinded assessor if not completed by clinical staff as part of the ASIA Impairment Scale/International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (AIS/ISNCSCI). |
Baseline, 8-weeks
|
|
Modified Ashworth Scale for Upper Extremity
Time Frame: Baseline, 8-weeks
|
This is an impairment scale to measure muscle spasticity or tone in response to passive lengthening of a muscle. It requires the participant to lay supine while study staff, the blinded assessor/therapist, passively moves a joint to lengthen a muscle over a joint's full range of motion over approximately 1 second, or approximately at the speed of gravity. Each joint/muscle tested may be tested up to three times. The scale rates resistance to passive movement from 0 (no increase in tone) to 4 (joint fixed in flexion or extension). For this study, only the upper limb will be tested as part of the protocol. |
Baseline, 8-weeks
|
|
Capabilities of Upper Extremity Questionnaire CUE-Q
Time Frame: Baseline, 8-weeks
|
The CUE-Q is a 32-item questionnaire that evaluates functional limitations of the hands and arms using a scale of perceived difficulty from 0 (unable) - 4 (no difficulty). Activities inquired about include reaching, lifting objects, pulling/sliding objects, holding small objects like coins, etc. This may take 5-15 minutes to administer. |
Baseline, 8-weeks
|
Other Outcome Measures
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Patient Assessment Instrument IRF-PAI (Section GG codes)
Time Frame: Baseline, 8-weeks
|
This assessment is designed solely for use during inpatient rehabilitation; it replaced the previous use of the FIM measure for inpatient rehabilitation. For this outcome, assessments will be completed by VA clinical therapist(s) who will categorize typical function over a 3-day admission period and during the final three days prior to discharge. This assessment categorizes functional level from 01 (dependent) to 6 (independent). For this study, this assessment will be completed as a portion of clinical assessment, and will include observation of specific functional activities as deemed appropriate & safe for clinical assessment including but not limited to: Self-care (upper body dressing, bathing,, toileting, oral hygiene, eating, etc), mobility ((rolling, sit to lying, lying to sitting edge of bed, sit to stand, chair to chair transfer, toilet transfer, walking various distances, stairs, wheeled mobility, etc), bowel and bladder continence, and health history (falls, pain, etc). |
Baseline, 8-weeks
|
|
PROMIS Pain Intensity and Pain Interference Scales
Time Frame: Baseline, 8-weeks
|
Promis Pain Intensity and Interference scales are short form assessments using a Likert scale addressing levels of pain or pain interference from 1 (not at all/never) - 7 (very much/always). These scales would take less than 10 minutes to complete. |
Baseline, 8-weeks
|
|
Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life - Resilience SCI-QOL
Time Frame: Baseline, 8-weeks
|
This assessment focused on measuring quality of life (QOL) across physical, emotional and global health domains using a Likert scale with ratings from 1 (lowest frequency, or never) to 5 (highest frequency or always). This scale is sometimes called the NeuroQOL, and has been updated to be structured like the PROMIS measures where it can be completed via paper forms, short forms, or a computer adaptive testing on a tool such as REDcap. The adaptive testing can take as little as 10 minutes and provides a T-score across a normalized scoring distribution of 100, where the mean is 50. |
Baseline, 8-weeks
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: John M Looft, PhD, Minneapolis VA
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Inanici F, Samejima S, Gad P, Edgerton VR, Hofstetter CP, Moritz CT. Transcutaneous Electrical Spinal Stimulation Promotes Long-Term Recovery of Upper Extremity Function in Chronic Tetraplegia. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2018 Jun;26(6):1272-1278. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2018.2834339.
- Inanici F, Brighton LN, Samejima S, Hofstetter CP, Moritz CT. Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation Restores Hand and Arm Function After Spinal Cord Injury. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2021;29:310-319. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2021.3049133. Epub 2021 Mar 2.
- Lakens D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol. 2013 Nov 26;4:863. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863.
- Zhang F, Momeni K, Ramanujam A, Ravi M, Carnahan J, Kirshblum S, Forrest GF. Cervical Spinal Cord Transcutaneous Stimulation Improves Upper Extremity and Hand Function in People With Complete Tetraplegia: A Case Study. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2020 Dec;28(12):3167-3174. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2020.3048592. Epub 2021 Jan 28.
- Freyvert Y, Yong NA, Morikawa E, Zdunowski S, Sarino ME, Gerasimenko Y, Edgerton VR, Lu DC. Engaging cervical spinal circuitry with non-invasive spinal stimulation and buspirone to restore hand function in chronic motor complete patients. Sci Rep. 2018 Oct 19;8(1):15546. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-33123-5.
- Chan AW, Boutron I, Hopewell S, Moher D, Schulz KF, Collins GS, Tunn R, Aggarwal R, Berkwits M, Berlin JA, Bhandari N, Butcher NJ, Campbell MK, Chidebe RCW, Elbourne DR, Farmer AJ, Fergusson DA, Golub RM, Goodman SN, Hoffmann TC, Ioannidis JPA, Kahan BC, Knowles RL, Lamb SE, Lewis S, Loder E, Offringa M, Ravaud P, Richards DP, Rockhold FW, Schriger DL, Siegfried NL, Staniszewska S, Taylor RS, Thabane L, Torgerson DJ, Vohra S, White IR, Hrobjartsson A. SPIRIT 2025 statement: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials. BMJ. 2025 Apr 28;389:e081477. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081477.
- Moritz C, Field-Fote EC, Tefertiller C, van Nes I, Trumbower R, Kalsi-Ryan S, Purcell M, Janssen TWJ, Krassioukov A, Morse LR, Zhao KD, Guest J, Marino RJ, Murray LM, Wecht JM, Rieger M, Pradarelli J, Turner A, D'Amico J, Squair JW, Courtine G. Non-invasive spinal cord electrical stimulation for arm and hand function in chronic tetraplegia: a safety and efficacy trial. Nat Med. 2024 May;30(5):1276-1283. doi: 10.1038/s41591-024-02940-9. Epub 2024 May 20.
- Chandrasekaran S, Bhagat NA, Ramdeo R, Ebrahimi S, Sharma PD, Griffin DG, Stein A, Harkema SJ, Bouton CE. Targeted transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation promotes persistent recovery of upper limb strength and tactile sensation in spinal cord injury: a pilot study. Front Neurosci. 2023 Jul 7;17:1210328. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1210328. eCollection 2023.
- Verma N, Oh J, Bedoy E, Chetty N, Steele AG, Park SJ, Guerrero JR, Faraji AH, Weber D, Sayenko DG. Transcutaneous stimulation of the cervical spinal cord facilitates motoneuron firing and improves hand-motor function after spinal cord injury. J Neurophysiol. 2025 Jul 1;134(1):128-143. doi: 10.1152/jn.00422.2024. Epub 2025 Jun 10.
- Taylor C, McHugh C, Mockler D, Minogue C, Reilly RB, Fleming N. Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review. PLoS One. 2021 Nov 18;16(11):e0260166. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260166. eCollection 2021.
- Molinares DM, Gater DR, Daniel S, Pontee NL. Nontraumatic Spinal Cord Injury: Epidemiology, Etiology and Management. J Pers Med. 2022 Nov 8;12(11):1872. doi: 10.3390/jpm12111872.
- Liu GF, Lu K, Mogg R, Mallick M, Mehrotra DV. Should baseline be a covariate or dependent variable in analyses of change from baseline in clinical trials? Stat Med. 2009 Sep 10;28(20):2509-30. doi: 10.1002/sim.3639.
- Ge L, Arul K, Ikpeze T, Baldwin A, Nickels JL, Mesfin A. Traumatic and Nontraumatic Spinal Cord Injuries. World Neurosurg. 2018 Mar;111:e142-e148. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.008. Epub 2017 Dec 15.
- Clifton L, Clifton DA. The correlation between baseline score and post-intervention score, and its implications for statistical analysis. Trials. 2019 Jan 11;20(1):43. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-3108-3.
- Alito A, Filardi V, Fama F, Bruschetta D, Ruggeri C, Basile G, Stancanelli L, D'Amico C, Bianconi S, Tisano A. Traumatic and non-traumatic spinal cord injury: Demographic characteristics, neurological and functional outcomes. A 7-year single centre experience. J Orthop. 2021 Nov 20;28:62-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2021.11.007. eCollection 2021 Nov-Dec.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 1904131
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
All IPD that underlie results in a publication
IPD Sharing Time Frame
The CRADA associated with this research indicates that the IPD and supporting information can be released after 180 days upon completion of the CRADA. We anticipate having the IPD and supporting information available after that period.
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
The PI and Statistician will review requests.
IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type
- SAP
- ANALYTIC_CODE
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.