- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT07592221
Combined Functional Electrical and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Foot Drop (tDCS)
Combined Functional Electrical and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Foot Drop: A Case Series
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Greg Thielman, EdD
- Phone Number: 8562667863
- Email: gthielman@sju.edu
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Sylvester Carter, PhD
- Phone Number: 215 596 7087
- Email: scarter1@sju.edu
Study Locations
-
-
Pennsylvania
-
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19104
- Recruiting
- Saint Joseph's University
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria: To participate, you must be:
- 18 years or older
- Have had 1 or more strokes (> 6 months) affecting ankle dorsiflexion.
- Discharged from all rehabilitative services.
- Can walk independently with/without using an assistive device such as a cane without an ankle-foot orthosis (AFO) for 15 minutes.
Exclusion Criteria: You must not have:
- An inability to repeat and understand 2-step commands.
- Peripheral neuropathy
- Damage to the skull or scalp, such as a fracture History of seizures or epilepsy Extremely high or low blood pressure or heart rate Chest pain or shortness of breath when you are resting Botox injections to your leg or foot in the last 4 months
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: FES and tDCS
The tDCS was applied as a bilateral montage with the anode of the tDCS device (ActivaDose II, ActivaTek Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah, USA) applied to the involved hemisphere and the cathode over the unaffected hemisphere. The dosage of the tDCS device was one mA for 60 minutes for the duration of the gait training delivered via a pair of sponge electrodes moistened with 0.9% NaCl solution. The exact locations for the electrode placements were based on a 20-point electrode system, in which we chose two points that targeted the motor cortex region corresponding to the left lower limb. Treatments were performed twice weekly over the 8 weeks. The FES was administered to the tibialis anterior muscle of the impaired lower extremity with one electrode over the common peroneal nerve at the head of the fibula and the other over a motor point in the middle of the muscle belly of the tibialis anterior muscle. |
The gait training consisted of treadmill training with forward and backward ambulation with speed progression as appropriate, ambulation over obstacles, ramp ambulation forwards and backwards, and stair ambulation up and down.
In each condition, cues were to increase toe clearance on the affected limb and achieve heel strike at initial contact.
Vitals were collected at the start and end of each session, and heart rate was measured at the end of each activity, along with the Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE), to determine whether the participant was working at a higher intensity than baseline.
|
|
Active Comparator: FES with tDCS subthreshold
The tDCS was applied as a bilateral montage with the anode of the tDCS device (ActivaDose II, ActivaTek Inc., Salt Lake City, UT, USA) applied to the involved hemisphere and the cathode over the unaffected hemisphere. The dosage of the tDCS device was set initially at one mA for 60 minutes and then for the duration of the gait training the machine was turned to subthreshold levels, delivered via a pair of sponge electrodes moistened with 0.9% NaCl solution. The exact locations for the electrode placements were based on a 20-point electrode system, in which we chose two points that targeted the motor cortex region corresponding to the left lower limb. Treatments were performed twice weekly over the 8 weeks. The FES was administered to the tibialis anterior muscle of the impaired lower extremity with one electrode over the common peroneal nerve at the head of the fibula and the other over a motor point in the middle of the muscle belly of the tibialis anterior muscle. |
The gait training consisted of treadmill training with forward and backward ambulation with speed progression as appropriate, ambulation over obstacles, ramp ambulation forwards and backwards, and stair ambulation up and down.
In each condition, cues were to increase toe clearance on the affected limb and achieve heel strike at initial contact.
Vitals were collected at the start and end of each session, and heart rate was measured at the end of each activity, along with the Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE), to determine whether the participant was working at a higher intensity than baseline.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
minimum toe clearance
Time Frame: A pretest at baseline 2-3 days prior to the start of the intervention and then after 12 training sessions (between 6 and 8 weeks) posttests will occur 2-3 days after the 12th and final intervention is completed.
|
For the motion capture, participants were fitted with a modified Cleveland Clinic marker set where 4 clusters of 4 markers were attached to the thighs and shanks, and wand-mounted markers were also attached bilaterally to the anterior superior iliac spines (ASIS) and the sacrum.
Additionally, seven 14 mm reflective markers were attached to the shoe at the upper ridge of the posterior surface of the calcaneus, sustentaculum tali, and lateral aspect of the calcaneus (peroneal tubercle); the heads of the first, second, and fifth metatarsals (MET); and the tip of the shoe/second digit if barefooted.
Scores will vary by participant, and the key finding is the change in score from pre- to post-testing, indicating whether or not the intervention effected this change.
Minimum value is 10 mm, max value is 40 mm, with a higher score indicating better and safer clearance.
|
A pretest at baseline 2-3 days prior to the start of the intervention and then after 12 training sessions (between 6 and 8 weeks) posttests will occur 2-3 days after the 12th and final intervention is completed.
|
|
Gait speed
Time Frame: A pretest at baseline 2-3 days prior to the start of the intervention and then a posttest 2-3 days after the 12th and final intervention is completed, 6-8 weeks after the start of the intervention.
|
time for participants to traverse 10 meters.
It is expected that post-training a lower score will be recorded, indicating faster walking and improved speed as a result of the intervention.
|
A pretest at baseline 2-3 days prior to the start of the intervention and then a posttest 2-3 days after the 12th and final intervention is completed, 6-8 weeks after the start of the intervention.
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Functional gait Assessment
Time Frame: A pretest at baseline 2-3 days prior to the start of the intervention and then a posttest 2-3 days after the 12th intervention session is completed, 6-8 weeks after the start of the intervention.
|
a series of walking and balancing tests that require walking 6 meters several times, performing different tasks.
A higher score is expected post training, indicating fewer concerns with falling.
|
A pretest at baseline 2-3 days prior to the start of the intervention and then a posttest 2-3 days after the 12th intervention session is completed, 6-8 weeks after the start of the intervention.
|
|
Activities Specific Balance Scale (ABC)
Time Frame: A pretest at baseline 2-3 days prior to the start of the intervention and then a posttest 2-3 days after the 12th and final intervention session is completed, 6-8 weeks after the training began.
|
Participants' perceived ability to safely perform a series of activities was rated on a percent scale.
This indicator will vary, as sometimes prior to training, individuals are unaware of the concerns of falling, and then sometimes post-training, one is more cautious, and it can be vice versa as well.
Thus, the goal is to look for patterns of change.
|
A pretest at baseline 2-3 days prior to the start of the intervention and then a posttest 2-3 days after the 12th and final intervention session is completed, 6-8 weeks after the training began.
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Gregory Thielman, EdD, Saint Joseph's University
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Hausdorff JM, Rios DA, Edelberg HK. Gait variability and fall risk in community-living older adults: a 1-year prospective study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Aug;82(8):1050-6. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.24893.
- Campbell AJ, Borrie MJ, Spears GF. Risk factors for falls in a community-based prospective study of people 70 years and older. J Gerontol. 1989 Jul;44(4):M112-7. doi: 10.1093/geronj/44.4.m112.
- Nolan KJ, Yarossi M. Weight transfer analysis in adults with hemiplegia using ankle foot orthosis. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2011 Mar;35(1):45-53. doi: 10.1177/0309364610393061.
- Hornbrook MC, Stevens VJ, Wingfield DJ, Hollis JF, Greenlick MR, Ory MG. Preventing falls among community-dwelling older persons: results from a randomized trial. Gerontologist. 1994 Feb;34(1):16-23. doi: 10.1093/geront/34.1.16.
- Blake AJ, Morgan K, Bendall MJ, Dallosso H, Ebrahim SB, Arie TH, Fentem PH, Bassey EJ. Falls by elderly people at home: prevalence and associated factors. Age Ageing. 1988 Nov;17(6):365-72. doi: 10.1093/ageing/17.6.365.
- Sterling DA, O'Connor JA, Bonadies J. Geriatric falls: injury severity is high and disproportionate to mechanism. J Trauma. 2001 Jan;50(1):116-9. doi: 10.1097/00005373-200101000-00021.
- Prudham D, Evans JG. Factors associated with falls in the elderly: a community study. Age Ageing. 1981 Aug;10(3):141-6. doi: 10.1093/ageing/10.3.141.
- Berg WP, Alessio HM, Mills EM, Tong C. Circumstances and consequences of falls in independent community-dwelling older adults. Age Ageing. 1997 Jul;26(4):261-8. doi: 10.1093/ageing/26.4.261.
- Maki BE. Gait changes in older adults: predictors of falls or indicators of fear. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997 Mar;45(3):313-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1997.tb00946.x.
- Al Bochi A, Delfi G, Dutta T. A Scoping Review on Minimum Foot Clearance: An Exploration of Level-Ground Clearance in Individuals with Abnormal Gait. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Sep 29;18(19):10289. doi: 10.3390/ijerph181910289.
- O'Dell MW, Dunning K, Kluding P, Wu SS, Feld J, Ginosian J, McBride K. Response and prediction of improvement in gait speed from functional electrical stimulation in persons with poststroke drop foot. PM R. 2014 Jul;6(7):587-601; quiz 601. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2014.01.001. Epub 2014 Jan 9.
- Peishun C, Haiwang Z, Taotao L, Hongli G, Yu M, Wanrong Z. Changes in Gait Characteristics of Stroke Patients with Foot Drop after the Combination Treatment of Foot Drop Stimulator and Moving Treadmill Training. Neural Plast. 2021 Nov 22;2021:9480957. doi: 10.1155/2021/9480957. eCollection 2021.
- Tsao Cw Fau - Aday AW, Aday Aw Fau - Almarzooq ZI, Almarzooq Zi Fau - Anderson CAM, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2023 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. (1524-4539 (Electronic))
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
- Nervous System Diseases
- Neuromuscular Diseases
- Peripheral Nervous System Diseases
- Mononeuropathies
- Peroneal Neuropathies
- Therapeutics
- Behavioral Disciplines and Activities
- Electric Stimulation Therapy
- Convulsive Therapy
- Psychiatric Somatic Therapies
- Electroshock
- Psychological Techniques
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
Other Study ID Numbers
- StJosephsU
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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.