Functional electrical stimulation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled pilot study.

Only 23 of the 40 randomized patients were analysed, and 17 dropped out or were excluded. The sample included only men. There was no group that received standard rehabilitation alone, so the study cannot show what either stimulation method adds to usual care. Both groups received standard supervised rehabilitation in addition to stimulation, so the contribution of FES alone cannot be separated. The study was a small pilot, so the strength findings are preliminary and need confirmation. Gait was tested only at comfortable, self-selected speed and with spatial-temporal measures, not with kinematics, kinetics, electromyography, dual-task or fast walking. Pain and stiffness were not controlled for, although they may influence gait. The FES treatment lasted 10 minutes per session, which the authors note is much shorter than FES gait training in other studies. Follow-up was only four weeks after surgery, so longer-term effects were not tested. The interactive nature of FES may have affected motivation and contributed to the FES group results.

No author conflicts of interest or funding statement appear in the supplied text; the article is tagged as supported by a non-U.S. government.

Do not conclude that FES alone caused the strength gains, because both groups also received standard supervised rehabilitation. Do not conclude that FES improves gait more than NMES, because gait speed and symmetry did not differ between groups. This was a small pilot in men, so the findings are preliminary.