StrokeNCT01123382
Electrical Stimulation for Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain
A study testing Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator and Outpatient Therapy in people with Stroke and Shoulder Pain, run by MetroHealth Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Post-stroke shoulder pain is a major rehabilitation problem affecting moderate to severely impaired stroke survivors. Surface electrical stimulation (ES) of muscles surrounding the hemiparetic shoulder has been demonstrated to be beneficial, but despite the evidence for therapeutic benefit, the clinical implementation… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke, Shoulder Pain
- What is being tested?
- Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator and Outpatient Therapy
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 25 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Jan 2010to Feb 2013
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 21 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- shoulder pain localized to the glenohumeral joint, subacromial area or deltoid insertion associated with any of the following conditions: a) rest; b) passive abduction or external rotation ROM; c) active abduction or external rotation ROM; or d) manual palpation
- weakness of shoulder abductors (≤4/5 on MRC if isolated movement is present)
- age ≥21-yrs
- time from stroke ≥ 3-mo
- shoulder pain onset after the most recent stroke
- duration of shoulder pain ≥ 3-mo
Show all 11Show fewer
- severity of shoulder pain on BPI-SF 3 ≥4
- cognitive ability to fulfill study requirements [a) exhibit 3 object immediate and 30 minute recall; b) ability to use a numeric rating scale (using a 0-10 numeric rating scale) by correctly ranking the tightness they feel on the unaffected arm of 3 low-pressure inflations with a standard sphygmomanometer cuff which follow a predetermined sequence (20, 40 and 0 mm Hg); and c) ability to follow 3-stage commands]
- availability of a reliable adult who can check the skin and assist the participant with the treatment protocol
- willing and able to report severity of shoulder pain throughout the study period
- willing to make all scheduled study visits post-implantation.
Who cannot join
- evidence of joint or overlying skin infection
- insensate skin
- >1 opioid or nonopioid analgesics daily for shoulder pain
- daily intake of pain medications for any other chronic pain
- intra-articular or subacromial steroid injections to the shoulder in the previous 12-wks
- botulinum toxin injection to the trapezius, pectoralis or subscapularis muscle in the previous 12-wks
Show all 21Show fewer
- receiving physical or occupational therapies for shoulder pain
- physician-diagnosed shoulder pathology symptomatic within the 5 yrs prior to CVA
- bleeding disorder
- INR>3.0 for those on warfarin [INR>3.0]
- poorly controlled diabetes [HbA1c>7.0]
- medical instability
- pregnancy
- uncontrolled seizures (>1/mo for 6-mo)
- uncompensated hemi-neglect
- severely impaired communication
- moderate to severe depression
- other confounding conditions such as ipsilateral upper limb lower motorneuron lesion, Parkinson's Disease, spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury or multiple sclerosis
- other medical issues such as complex regional pain syndrome, bicipital tendonitis, myofacial pain syndrome, etc.
- the following cardiac conditions: a) history of arrhythmia with hemodynamic instability, such as ventricular tachycardia, supraventricular tachycardia and rapid ventricular response atrial fibrillation; b) any implantable stimulator such as demand pacemakers or defibrillators; and c) valvular heart disease including artificial valves (due to risk of infection and endocarditis)
- likely non-compliance factors such as distance from the center, inadequate social support, or psychiatric/psychologic factors
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Post-stroke shoulder pain is a major rehabilitation problem affecting moderate to severely impaired stroke survivors. Surface electrical stimulation (ES) of muscles surrounding the hemiparetic shoulder has been demonstrated to be beneficial, but despite the evidence for therapeutic benefit, the clinical implementation of surface ES for poststroke shoulder pain has been difficult. In order to address the limitations of surface ES, the investigative team pioneered the development of percutaneous intramuscular (IM) ES for the treatment of post-stroke shoulder pain. However, prior to acceptance by the clinical community, additional gaps in the scientific and clinical knowledge need to be addressed. This study begins to do so. The primary objective is to estimate the relative pain reduction associated with IM ES vs. "usual care." We hypothesize that the IM ES group will exhibit a larger effect size with respect to pain reduction compared to "usual care". A secondary objective is to estimate the effect on health related QOL of IM ES vs. "usual care." Demonstration of improvement in QOL will validate the clinical relevance of the intervention. We hypothesize that the IM ES group will exhibit greater improvement in health related QOL compared to "usual care".
- Conditions
- Stroke, Shoulder Pain
- Being tested
- Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator, Outpatient Therapy
- Keywords
- Stroke, Shoulder pain, Electrical stimulation, Neuromuscular stimulation, Intramuscular stimulation
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke, Shoulder Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Intramuscular Electrical StimulatorDevice
A sterile percutaneous IM electrode is implanted in the shoulder using a 20-gauge hypodermic needle and connected to an external cable. The exit site and electrode are covered by a bandage, but the cable extends out. After a one week stabilization period, the cable is connected to a stimulator. A self-adhesive surface electrode serves as the indifferent electrode. Stimulation intensity is set by the investigator. The prescription for daily stimulation treatment will be 6 hrs. The duty cycle and daily dose will remain constant throughout the treatment, but stimulus parameters may be adjusted by the research staff as deemed appropriate. The treatment period will be 3 weeks, after which the electrode will be removed. Total time of electrode implantation is no more than 29 days.
Outpatient TherapyOther
Subjects will receive 8 hrs of outpatient therapy over a four week period from a treating therapist, coupled with prescribed daily home exercises. The therapist will implement an individualized treatment plan consistent with the needs of the participant.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| IM Electrical Stimulation (IM ES) | Experimental | The IM ES Group will receive electrical stimulation treatment for three weeks (6 hrs daily) with an Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator following a one week electrode stabilization period. Receives: Device: Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator |
| Usual Care (UC) | Active comparator | The Usual Care Group will receive outpatient therapy for four weeks, coupled with prescribed daily home exercises. Receives: Other: Outpatient Therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Brief Pain Inventory Short Form
The BPI is a pain questionnaire, which assesses both pain intensity (sensory dimension) and the interference (reactive dimension) of pain in daily activities. Pain intensity is measured on a 0 - 10 scale, with 0 being no pain and 10 being worst possible.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Secondary outcomes (8)
ShoulderQ VGRS Scale
The ShoulderQ Visual Graphics Rating Scale (VGRS) T is a structured questionnaire designed to assess severity of HSP at rest during the day, on movement, and at night on a 0-30 scale where higher numbers indicate greater pain.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
SF-36 Bodily Pain Component
The SF-36v2 is a population-norm based health related quality of life measure, presented in T-scores where population average equals a score of 50 with a standard deviation of 10. Maximum is 100, with higher score indicating greater health realated quality of life.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Pain-free External ROM, Degrees
Passive pain-free Externa ROM is a motor recovery measure. The subject was supine with the shoulder adducted with hand resting on the abdomen, elbow flexed, and with the humerus supported by the mat. The axis of a universal goniometer was centered on the olecranon process of the ulna projecting through the humeral shaft toward the humeral head. The subject's shoulder was externally rotated passively to the pain threshold, defined as the start of any pain. Pain at rest was recorded as 0 degrees.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Fugl-Myer Motor Assessment (FMA) - Upper Extremity
The Fugl-Myer Motor Assessment (FMA) is a motor recovery measure. Volitional movement of the upper limb (shoulder, elbow, forearm, wrist, and hand) is examined in and out of synergies. Each item was graded on a 3-point ordinal scale and summed to provide a maximum score of 66, with higher scores indicating lower impairment.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Pain Interference Questionnaire
BPI-9 from Brief Pain Inventory, Short Form. Pain interference is on a 0 - 10 scale, with 0 being no interference, and 10 being complete interference.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Isometric Shoulder Abduction Moment, Ratio Affected to Unaffected
A measure of isometric strength in response to audio cue. Isometric shoulder abduction moment was measured with a Biodex Biomechanical Measurement System (Biodex Medical Systems, Shirley, NY). The average moment during the last second of the audible tone was calculated for each trial and those values were averaged over the three trials. Subjects underwent testing of both shoulders, non-paretic side first, and the results are presented as the ratio of the paretic shoulder to the non-paretic shoulder to decrease the influence of intra-subject variability between measurements.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Delay in Initiation of Shoulder Abduction EMG Activity
Electromyographic activity from the deltoid was also measured during the isometric abduction moment trials. Surface EMG recording electrodes (2 cm x 2 cm) were placed over the deltoid muscle and spaced approximately 4 cm apart. The EMG amplifier gain was adjusted to record as high-fidelity an EMG signal as possible during shoulder abduction. Delay of initiation (DOI) was defined as the duration between onset of the audibe tone and the onset of EMG signal. Raw EMG signals were analyzed visually to determine the earliest rise in EMG activity relative to steady state for delay of initiation. The mean DOI of the three trials were calculated, and the ratio of the paretic to non-paretic shoulder DOI were used as summary metrics.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Delay in Termination of Shoulder Abduction EMG Activity
Electromyographic activity from the deltoid was also measured during the isometric abduction moment trials. Surface EMG recording electrodes (2 cm x 2 cm) were placed over the deltoid muscle and spaced approximately 4 cm apart. The EMG amplifier gain was adjusted to record as high-fidelity an EMG signal as possible during shoulder abduction. Delay of termination (DOT) was defined as the duration between cessation of the audible tone and return of the EMG signal to baseline. Raw EMG signals were analyzed visually to determine the earliest rise in EMG activity relative to steady state for delay of initiation, and return to steady for delay of termination. The mean DOT of the three trials were calculated, and the ratio of the paretic to non-paretic shoulder DOT were used as summary metrics.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 May 2010 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2010
- Primary completionFeb 2013
- Study completionFeb 2013
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for StrokeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 25 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- MetroHealth Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), Case Western Reserve University
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, John Chae, MD, MetroHealth Medical Center
- Investigators
- John Chae, MD, Principal investigator, MetroHealth Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01123382
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R01HD059777
- Other IDs
- R01HD059777
- Status last verified
- Dec 2017
- First submitted
- 12 May 2010
- Last updated
- 23 Jan 2018
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Yu DT, Chae J, Walker ME, Fang ZP. Percutaneous intramuscular neuromuscular electric stimulation for the treatment of shoulder subluxation and pain in patients with chronic hemiplegia: a pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Jan;82(1):20-5. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.18666.
PubMed 11239281Yu DT, Chae J, Walker ME, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Frost FS, Grill JH, Feldstein M, Fang ZP. Intramuscular neuromuscular electric stimulation for poststroke shoulder pain: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 May;85(5):695-704. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.015.
PubMed 15129391Chae J, Yu DT, Walker ME, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Frost FS, Grill JH, Fang ZP. Intramuscular electrical stimulation for hemiplegic shoulder pain: a 12-month follow-up of a multiple-center, randomized clinical trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Nov;84(11):832-42. doi: 10.1097/01.phm.0000184154.01880.72.
PubMed 16244520Chae J, Ng A, Yu DT, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Fang ZP. Intramuscular electrical stimulation for shoulder pain in hemiplegia: does time from stroke onset predict treatment success? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 Nov-Dec;21(6):561-7. doi: 10.1177/1545968306298412. Epub 2007 Mar 16.
PubMed 17369520Wilson RD, Gunzler DD, Bennett ME, Chae J. Peripheral nerve stimulation compared with usual care for pain relief of hemiplegic shoulder pain: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Jan;93(1):17-28. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000011.
PubMed 24355994
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Jan 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Electrical Stimulation for Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01123382
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- R01HD059777
- Conditions
- Stroke, Shoulder Pain
- Keywords
- Stroke, Shoulder pain, Electrical stimulation, Neuromuscular stimulation, Intramuscular stimulation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 25 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- MetroHealth Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), Case Western Reserve University
- Study start
- Jan 2010
- Primary completion
- Feb 2013 (actual)
- Study completion
- Feb 2013 (actual)
- First posted
- 14 May 2010 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 12 Dec 2017
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Post-stroke shoulder pain is a major rehabilitation problem affecting moderate to severely impaired stroke survivors. Surface electrical stimulation (ES) of muscles surrounding the hemiparetic shoulder has been demonstrated to be beneficial, but despite the evidence for therapeutic benefit, the clinical implementation of surface ES for poststroke shoulder pain has been difficult. In order to address the limitations of surface ES, the investigative team pioneered the development of percutaneous intramuscular (IM) ES for the treatment of post-stroke shoulder pain. However, prior to acceptance by the clinical community, additional gaps in the scientific and clinical knowledge need to be addressed. This study begins to do so. The primary objective is to estimate the relative pain reduction associated with IM ES vs. "usual care." We hypothesize that the IM ES group will exhibit a larger effect size with respect to pain reduction compared to "usual care". A secondary objective is to estimate the effect on health related QOL of IM ES vs. "usual care." Demonstration of improvement in QOL will validate the clinical relevance of the intervention. We hypothesize that the IM ES group will exhibit greater improvement in health related QOL compared to "usual care".
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| IM Electrical Stimulation (IM ES) | Experimental | Device: Intramuscular Electrical StimulatorThe IM ES Group will receive electrical stimulation treatment for three weeks (6 hrs daily) with an Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator following a one week electrode stabilization period. |
| Usual Care (UC) | Active comparator | Other: Outpatient TherapyThe Usual Care Group will receive outpatient therapy for four weeks, coupled with prescribed daily home exercises. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (11 listed)
- shoulder pain localized to the glenohumeral joint, subacromial area or deltoid insertion associated with any of the following conditions: a) rest; b) passive abduction or external rotation ROM; c) active abduction or external rotation ROM; or d) manual palpation
- weakness of shoulder abductors (≤4/5 on MRC if isolated movement is present)
- age ≥21-yrs
- time from stroke ≥ 3-mo
- shoulder pain onset after the most recent stroke
Key exclusion criteria (21 listed)
- evidence of joint or overlying skin infection
- insensate skin
- >1 opioid or nonopioid analgesics daily for shoulder pain
- daily intake of pain medications for any other chronic pain
- intra-articular or subacromial steroid injections to the shoulder in the previous 12-wks
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Intramuscular Electrical StimulatorA sterile percutaneous IM electrode is implanted in the shoulder using a 20-gauge hypodermic needle and connected to an external cable. The exit site and electrode are covered by a bandage, but the cable extends out. After a one week stabilization period, the cable is connected to a stimulator. A self-adhesive surface electrode serves as the indifferent electrode. Stimulation intensity is set by the investigator. The prescription for daily stimulation treatment will be 6 hrs. The duty cycle and daily dose will remain constant throughout the treatment, but stimulus parameters may be adjusted by the research staff as deemed appropriate. The treatment period will be 3 weeks, after which the electrode will be removed. Total time of electrode implantation is no more than 29 days. | Device | IM Electrical Stimulation (IM ES) |
| Outpatient TherapySubjects will receive 8 hrs of outpatient therapy over a four week period from a treating therapist, coupled with prescribed daily home exercises. The therapist will implement an individualized treatment plan consistent with the needs of the participant. | Other | Usual Care (UC) |
Primary outcome
Brief Pain Inventory Short Form
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
The BPI is a pain questionnaire, which assesses both pain intensity (sensory dimension) and the interference (reactive dimension) of pain in daily activities. Pain intensity is measured on a 0 - 10 scale, with 0 being no pain and 10 being worst possible.
8 secondary outcomes
ShoulderQ VGRS Scale
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
SF-36 Bodily Pain Component
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Pain-free External ROM, Degrees
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Fugl-Myer Motor Assessment (FMA) - Upper Extremity
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Pain Interference Questionnaire
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Isometric Shoulder Abduction Moment, Ratio Affected to Unaffected
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Delay in Initiation of Shoulder Abduction EMG Activity
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Delay in Termination of Shoulder Abduction EMG Activity
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Jan 2018.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 11239281Yu DT, Chae J, Walker ME, Fang ZP. Percutaneous intramuscular neuromuscular electric stimulation for the treatment of shoulder subluxation and pain in patients with chronic hemiplegia: a pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Jan;82(1):20-5. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.18666.
- Background: PubMed 15129391Yu DT, Chae J, Walker ME, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Frost FS, Grill JH, Feldstein M, Fang ZP. Intramuscular neuromuscular electric stimulation for poststroke shoulder pain: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 May;85(5):695-704. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.015.
- Background: PubMed 16244520Chae J, Yu DT, Walker ME, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Frost FS, Grill JH, Fang ZP. Intramuscular electrical stimulation for hemiplegic shoulder pain: a 12-month follow-up of a multiple-center, randomized clinical trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Nov;84(11):832-42. doi: 10.1097/01.phm.0000184154.01880.72.
- Background: PubMed 17369520Chae J, Ng A, Yu DT, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Fang ZP. Intramuscular electrical stimulation for shoulder pain in hemiplegia: does time from stroke onset predict treatment success? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 Nov-Dec;21(6):561-7. doi: 10.1177/1545968306298412. Epub 2007 Mar 16.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 24355994Wilson RD, Gunzler DD, Bennett ME, Chae J. Peripheral nerve stimulation compared with usual care for pain relief of hemiplegic shoulder pain: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Jan;93(1):17-28. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000011.
- Cleveland FES CenterLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Closed-Loop SCS-BCI for Post-Stroke Hemiplegia
Stroke, Motor Dysfunction
Active, not recruiting
Transferring Speed of Processing Gains to Everyday Cognitive Tasks After Stroke
Stroke, Cognitive Dysfunction
Not yet recruitingObservational study
A Speaking-Valve-Based Decannulation Protocol for Tracheostomized Stroke Patients
Stroke Patients, Tracheostomy
RecruitingPhase 4
Blood Pressure Reduction to Limit the Evolution of Vascular Brain Lesions in Elderly Individuals
Cerebrovascular Disorders
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Early Tendon Vibrations on Upper Limb Motor Recovery After a Stroke
Acute Stroke, Upper Limb Motor Deficit
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
John Chae, MD principal investigator
MetroHealth Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator and Outpatient Therapy in people with Stroke and Shoulder Pain, run by MetroHealth Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 11 inclusion and 21 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Jan 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 12 Dec 2017). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (time frame: Baseline (Week 0); Start of Treatment (Week 1); End of Treatment (EOT, Week 4); EOT + 6 wks (Week 10); EOT + 12 wks (Week 16)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01123382, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Jan 2018.