Effects of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation on upper-limb impairment after stroke: A randomized, controlled, single-blind trial.
Hewei Wang, Yuzhi Xiang, Chuankai Wang and 8 others
PMID 36380681WHAT IT FOUND
Adding transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation to standard stroke rehabilitation did not improve upper limb motor recovery more than sham stimulation.
The primary outcome showed no significant difference between groups.
Key findings
01The primary outcome, change in Upper-Extremity Fugl-Meyer score, showed no significant difference between the TEAS and sham groups at the end of treatment.
02There were no significant between-group differences in secondary outcomes such as muscle strength, spasticity, hand function, or activities of daily living at 6 weeks.
03A small but significant difference in wrist extension muscle strength was found in the TEAS group at 18 weeks, though this was a secondary outcome.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Most participants (75.5%) had severe upper limb impairment, so results may not apply to those with mild or moderate impairment. The study used only two acupoints; other protocols using more acupoints might yield different results. The positive finding for wrist extension strength at 18 weeks was a secondary outcome and may be due to chance. Floor effects on hand function and daily living scales may have masked potential differences.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. Funding was provided by various Chinese government health and science grants.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that TEAS is ineffective for all stroke patients or all acupoints. This trial tested only two acupoints in a population with predominantly severe impairment. The small positive finding for wrist extension strength at 18 weeks is a secondary result and should not be treated as primary evidence of efficacy.