StrokeNCT07629908
Effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation With Neural Mobilization in Stroke Patients
A study testing Conventional physical therapy and Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in people with Stroke and Post Stroke Hand Rehabilitation, run by Riphah International University.
Trial summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with upper limb neural mobilization works to improve hand grip and upper limb function in post-stroke patients. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 45 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke, Post Stroke Hand Rehabilitation
- What is being tested?
- Conventional physical therapy and Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 44 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Jun 2026to Aug 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 45 to 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Diagnosed with ischemic stroke (duration ≥ 3 months post-stroke)
- Patients with hemiparesis affecting the upper limb have a 15-30 score by the Fugl-Meyer Assessment.
- Medically stable for physical therapy
- Signed informed consent
Who cannot join
- Patients with pacemakers or implanted electrical devices
- Upper limb fractures or contractures
- Skin allergies or wounds over the stimulation site
- Previously taking physiotherapy for the last 3 months.
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Official title: Effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Combined With Upper Limb Neural Mobilization on Hand Grip and Range of Motion in Post Stroke Patients
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with upper limb neural mobilization works to improve hand grip and upper limb function in post-stroke patients.
Read the detailed description
Literature Review: In previous studies researcher compared Dynamic Neural Mobilization and Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) in 30 sub-acute stroke patients, divided into two groups (15 each). Both groups received 30-minute sessions, 5 days/week for 4 weeks. Pre-test FMA-UE scores were 33.60±7.13 (Group A) vs. 32.60±9.85 (Group B), and grip strength 2.92±1.07 kg vs. 1.70±0.68 kg. Post-test scores improved to 41.00±7.07 and 5.12±2.03 kg (Group A), and 34.13±10.40 and 3.32±0.82 kg (Group B). Dynamic Neural Mobilization showed significantly better improvements in both outcomes.
A randomised controlled experiment with forty-three stroke patients who had hemiplegia in order to evaluate the impact of neural mobilisation in conjunction with shoulder control training,. The additional effect of neural mobilisation in stroke rehabilitation was supported by the treatment group's considerably higher improvements in upper limb motor function (FMA-UE) and shoulder pain (NRS) after four weeks when compared to the control group that received only shoulder training.
A qualitative review of 16 studies on neurodynamics in stroke patients, including 9 RCTs, 3 clinical trials, 3 systematic reviews, and 1 case study. Most studies reported that neurodynamics improved range of motion, flexibility, tone reduction, pain, nerve conduction, cortical activity, and post-stroke function. Only one RCT reported no effect on spasticity. Despite these benefits, the review concluded that evidence remains limited and more high-quality research is needed to validate neurodynamic techniques in stroke rehabilitation.
A case study of a 68-year-old male post-stroke patient with right-sided hemiparesis. The patient received Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation combined with Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) therapy for 4 sessions over 2 weeks. Post-treatment, improvements were noted in muscle strength and reduction of pain during passive flexion of the shoulder, elbow, and knee. The study concluded that Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation and Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) effectively promote muscle growth, strength, and pain relief in hemiparetic stroke patients.
A systematic review on the effectiveness of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) for post-stroke spastic hemiparetic limbs. A total of 26 studies were screened, and 9 clinical studies were included (7 upper limb, 2 lower limb). Spasticity was assessed using Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) and Electromyography. Most studies reported a decrease in spasticity lasting at least two weeks post-intervention. The authors concluded Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) is effective both alone or combined with physical therapy, while recommending further studies on Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) parameters.
A parallel two-arm open-label trial on 26 sub-acute stroke patients using an interactive grasp rehabilitation system (S2) combining smart objects, orthoses, and forearm Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES). Participants were block-randomized into experimental (n=14) and control (n=12) groups, receiving 30-minute sessions over 27 sessions. In patients with ARAT scores <35 (n=11), the experimental group showed greater improvement (+14.9 points on ARAT; p=0.0494). The study confirmed the feasibility and effectiveness of enriched Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES)-based grasp rehabilitation.
A case study on three first-incident stroke survivors in South Africa to assess the effects of activity-based Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) during short inpatient care. Patients received two 30-minute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) sessions daily along with occupational therapy for five days. Significant improvements were observed in motor function (FMA, p=0.002) and activities of daily living (MBI, p<0.001), particularly in toilet transfer, hygiene, and washing. Better cognitive function (MMSE scores) was associated with greater outcomes, while age and dominance had less impact.
A randomized controlled trial on 20 tetraplegic patients with upper limb spasticity (C5-C8 level). Participants were randomized into neurodynamic mobilization (n=11) and conventional therapy (n=9) groups, receiving treatment 5 days/week for 4 weeks. Neurodynamic mobilization showed significant improvements: MAS for wrist flexors (-1.64±0.67), finger flexors (-1.00±0.63), F-wave amplitude (-154.09±220.86), F/M ratio (-0.18±0.24), and CUE scores (+17.82±13.49), indicating reduced spasticity and improved upper limb function.
A randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with mirror therapy. They reported significant improvements in hand function, motor control, and cortical excitability compared to conventional therapy alone in chronic stroke patients.
In a review of innovative neurotechnologies, that the effect of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in regaining motor function following a stroke. According to the study, Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) enhances muscle strength and neuroplasticity, especially when paired with voluntary movement and task-specific training. The authors also go over the advantages of combining Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) with closed-loop systems and brain-machine interfaces to improve the accuracy and results of motor rehabilitation.
A systematic review to assess the status of peripheral neural mechanics and the effect of neural mobilization in stroke rehabilitation. The search across multiple databases identified 22 studies, out of which 12 were included (7 RCTs, 3 quasi-experimental, 1 case report, 1 systematic review). Most studies reported positive therapeutic benefits of neural mobilization, but due to limited methodological quality, the evidence remains weak. The review emphasized the need for further high-quality research on neural mobilization in stroke patients.
Study Gap: Despite the proven benefits of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation and neural mobilization in stroke rehabilitation, current literature largely examines these interventions in isolation. To date, up to the researcher's knowledge, no study has directly assessed the combined effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation and neural mobilization on hand grip strength and upper limb function in post-stroke patients. Additionally, there is limited evidence on standardized protocols for their integration in upper limb rehabilitation.
Given that Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation targets muscle activation and neural mobilization addresses nerve mobility, combining both may produce synergistic improvements in motor function of upper limb and hand grip. This study aims to fill this gap by evaluating the effectiveness of a combined approach, providing evidence-based strategies for optimizing stroke rehabilitation outcomes.
- Conditions
- Stroke, Post Stroke Hand Rehabilitation
- Being tested
- Conventional physical therapy, Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation
- Keywords
- Post stroke, NMES, Neural mobilization, Hand grip, Upper limb function
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Conventional physical therapyOther
Also called Neural mobilization, Traditional physical therapy
Neural mobilization for median, radial, and ulnar nerves. 3 sets of 10 repetitions per nerve for 15 mins with 30 sec rest. Progressed based on tolerance and Range of Motion.
Conventional rehabilitation consisted of standardized upper limb exercises, including ROM activities, strengthening exercises, stretching and tsk oriented training. Each treatment session was conducted for 45 minutes.
Neuromuscular Electrical StimulationOther
Also called Neural mobilization
Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) applied to wrist extensors and finger flexors. Frequency: 35 Hz. Pulse width: 250 µs. Duty cycle: 10s on / 20s off. Intensity: Visible muscle contraction, within patient tolerance. Duration: 30 min Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) + 15 min rest/cool-down.
Neural mobilization for median, radial, and ulnar nerves. 3 sets of 10 repetitions per nerve with 30 sec rest.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control group | Active comparator | Participants in the control group received neural mobilization in combination with conventional physical therapy. Conventional rehabilitation consisted of standardized upper limb exercises, including ROM activities, strengthening exercises, stretching and task oriented training. Receives: Other: Conventional physical therapy |
| Experimental group | Experimental | Participants in the experimental group received neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with upper limb neural mobilization. NMES was administrated using a frequency range of 35-50 Hz and a pulse duration of 250-300 µsec, with an on-off ratio of 1:3. The stimulation intensity was gradually increased until a visible muscle contraction was achieved. Neural mobilization was performed using standardized techniques targeting the median, radial and ulnar nerves. Receives: Other: Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Handheld dynamometer
The standard Jamar hydraulic handgrip dynamometer with reliability (ICC = 0.95-0.98) was used according to established ASHT (American Society of Hand Therapists) protocols for the measurement of hand grip strength. The patient was seated with shoulder adducted, elbow flexed at 90°, forearm neutral, and wrist 0-30° extension. A total of three trials (kg) with a 1-minute rest between trials was done, and the mean of the 3 values was recorded.
Measured: Baseline and 6th week
Goniometer
A clinically accepted instrument with high reliability (ICC: 0.85 - 0.99), in accordance with standardised assessment protocols. Each movement was measured across three trails with a 1-minute rest period between trails, and the average of the three readings (in degrees) was used for statistical analysis.
Measured: baseline and 6th week
Fugl-Meyer Assessment - Upper Extremity
The scale assesses motor recovery by observing movement patterns that advance from proximal to distal joints and from mass synergistic actions to more selective, isolated movements following a stroke. It consists of 4 sections: shoulder-arm, wrist, hand, and coordination and speed. It comprises 33 test items, each scored on a three-point ordinal scale (0-2) with a maximum achievable score of 66. In stroke patients the scale has revealed high reliability (ICC: 0.993 - 0.997).
Measured: Baseline and 6th week
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Jun 2026
- Study startJun 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completionJun 2026 (estimated)
- Study completionAug 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (11)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for StrokeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Riphah International UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 44 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Riphah International University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Hira Jabeen, Principal investigator, Riphah International UniversityJabeen, Principal investigator, Riphah International University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07629908
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- REC/0235 Fatima Shahid
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 1 Jun 2026
- Last updated
- 5 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Crema A, Bassolino M, Guanziroli E, Colombo M, Blanke O, Serino A, Micera S, Molteni F. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation restores upper limb sensory-motor functions and body representations in chronic stroke survivors. Med. 2022 Jan 14;3(1):58-74.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.medj.2021.12.001. Epub 2022 Jan 7.
PubMed 35590144Baradie RSA. Neurodynamics and mobilization in Stroke Rehabilitation- A Systematic Review. Majmaah Journal of Health Sciences. 2020;5(2).
Micera S, Caleo M, Chisari C, Hummel FC, Pedrocchi A. Advanced Neurotechnologies for the Restoration of Motor Function. Neuron. 2020 Feb 19;105(4):604-620. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2020.01.039.
PubMed 32078796Eschle S, Hartmann K, Rieger A, Fischer S, Klima A, Bergmann M. Canine vaccination in Germany: A survey of owner attitudes and compliance. PLoS One. 2020 Aug 27;15(8):e0238371. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238371. eCollection 2020.
PubMed 32853287Saxena A, Sehgal S, Jangra MK. Effectiveness of Neurodynamic Mobilization versus Conventional Therapy on Spasticity Reduction and Upper Limb Function in Tetraplegic Patients. Asian Spine J. 2021 Aug;15(4):498-503. doi: 10.31616/asj.2020.0146. Epub 2020 Oct 19.
PubMed 33059433Badenhorst. A CASE STUDY TO DETERMINE THE EFFECT OF AN ACTIVITY-BASED NEUROMUSCULAR ELECTRICAL STIMULATION (NMES) PROGRAMME. 2020.
Crema A, Furfaro I, Raschella F, Rossini M, Zajc J, Wiesener C, Baccinelli W, Proserpio D, Augsten A, Immick N, Becker S, Weber M, Schauer T, Krakow K, Gasperini G, Molteni F, Russold MF, Bulgheroni M, Micera S. Reactive Exercises with Interactive Objects: Interim Analysis of a Randomized Trial on Task-Driven NMES Grasp Rehabilitation for Subacute and Early Chronic Stroke Patients. Sensors (Basel). 2021 Oct 11;21(20):6739. doi: 10.3390/s21206739.
PubMed 34695957Chodijah S. THE EFFECT OF NEUROMUSCULAR ELECTRICAL STIMULATION (NMES) AND PROPRIOCEPTIVE NEUROMUSCULAR FACILITATION (PNF) IN INCREASING EXTREMITY MUSCLE STRENGTH OF HEMIPARESIS DEXTRA PATIENT: A CASE STUDY. Academic Physiotherapy Conference Proceeding. 2022;1.
HU Y. Effect of neural mobilization based on shoulder control training on shoulder pain and upper limb function in stroke patients with hemiplegia. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice. 2024;2.
Selvaraj. Dynamic Neural Mobilization Versus Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation on Grip Strength and UpperLimb Function in Sub-Acute Stroke Subjects. Indian Journal of Physiotherapy & Occupational Therapy. 2025;19(1)
Zamurd D, Baig M. Neurodynamics for motor recovery after Stroke, a Review Article. 2023;17:1008.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Combined With Upper Limb Neural Mobilization on Hand Grip and Range of Motion in Post Stroke Patients
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07629908
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- REC/0235 Fatima Shahid
- Conditions
- Stroke, Post Stroke Hand Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- Post stroke, NMES, Neural mobilization, Hand grip, Upper limb function
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 44 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Riphah International UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Aug 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 5 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with upper limb neural mobilization works to improve hand grip and upper limb function in post-stroke patients.
Detailed description
Literature Review: In previous studies researcher compared Dynamic Neural Mobilization and Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) in 30 sub-acute stroke patients, divided into two groups (15 each). Both groups received 30-minute sessions, 5 days/week for 4 weeks. Pre-test FMA-UE scores were 33.60±7.13 (Group A) vs. 32.60±9.85 (Group B), and grip strength 2.92±1.07 kg vs. 1.70±0.68 kg. Post-test scores improved to 41.00±7.07 and 5.12±2.03 kg (Group A), and 34.13±10.40 and 3.32±0.82 kg (Group B). Dynamic Neural Mobilization showed significantly better improvements in both outcomes.
A randomised controlled experiment with forty-three stroke patients who had hemiplegia in order to evaluate the impact of neural mobilisation in conjunction with shoulder control training,. The additional effect of neural mobilisation in stroke rehabilitation was supported by the treatment group's considerably higher improvements in upper limb motor function (FMA-UE) and shoulder pain (NRS) after four weeks when compared to the control group that received only shoulder training.
A qualitative review of 16 studies on neurodynamics in stroke patients, including 9 RCTs, 3 clinical trials, 3 systematic reviews, and 1 case study. Most studies reported that neurodynamics improved range of motion, flexibility, tone reduction, pain, nerve conduction, cortical activity, and post-stroke function. Only one RCT reported no effect on spasticity. Despite these benefits, the review concluded that evidence remains limited and more high-quality research is needed to validate neurodynamic techniques in stroke rehabilitation.
A case study of a 68-year-old male post-stroke patient with right-sided hemiparesis. The patient received Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation combined with Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) therapy for 4 sessions over 2 weeks. Post-treatment, improvements were noted in muscle strength and reduction of pain during passive flexion of the shoulder, elbow, and knee. The study concluded that Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation and Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation (PNF) effectively promote muscle growth, strength, and pain relief in hemiparetic stroke patients.
A systematic review on the effectiveness of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) for post-stroke spastic hemiparetic limbs. A total of 26 studies were screened, and 9 clinical studies were included (7 upper limb, 2 lower limb). Spasticity was assessed using Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) and Electromyography. Most studies reported a decrease in spasticity lasting at least two weeks post-intervention. The authors concluded Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) is effective both alone or combined with physical therapy, while recommending further studies on Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) parameters.
A parallel two-arm open-label trial on 26 sub-acute stroke patients using an interactive grasp rehabilitation system (S2) combining smart objects, orthoses, and forearm Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES). Participants were block-randomized into experimental (n=14) and control (n=12) groups, receiving 30-minute sessions over 27 sessions. In patients with ARAT scores <35 (n=11), the experimental group showed greater improvement (+14.9 points on ARAT; p=0.0494). The study confirmed the feasibility and effectiveness of enriched Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES)-based grasp rehabilitation.
A case study on three first-incident stroke survivors in South Africa to assess the effects of activity-based Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) during short inpatient care. Patients received two 30-minute Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) sessions daily along with occupational therapy for five days. Significant improvements were observed in motor function (FMA, p=0.002) and activities of daily living (MBI, p<0.001), particularly in toilet transfer, hygiene, and washing. Better cognitive function (MMSE scores) was associated with greater outcomes, while age and dominance had less impact.
A randomized controlled trial on 20 tetraplegic patients with upper limb spasticity (C5-C8 level). Participants were randomized into neurodynamic mobilization (n=11) and conventional therapy (n=9) groups, receiving treatment 5 days/week for 4 weeks. Neurodynamic mobilization showed significant improvements: MAS for wrist flexors (-1.64±0.67), finger flexors (-1.00±0.63), F-wave amplitude (-154.09±220.86), F/M ratio (-0.18±0.24), and CUE scores (+17.82±13.49), indicating reduced spasticity and improved upper limb function.
A randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with mirror therapy. They reported significant improvements in hand function, motor control, and cortical excitability compared to conventional therapy alone in chronic stroke patients.
In a review of innovative neurotechnologies, that the effect of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in regaining motor function following a stroke. According to the study, Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) enhances muscle strength and neuroplasticity, especially when paired with voluntary movement and task-specific training. The authors also go over the advantages of combining Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) with closed-loop systems and brain-machine interfaces to improve the accuracy and results of motor rehabilitation.
A systematic review to assess the status of peripheral neural mechanics and the effect of neural mobilization in stroke rehabilitation. The search across multiple databases identified 22 studies, out of which 12 were included (7 RCTs, 3 quasi-experimental, 1 case report, 1 systematic review). Most studies reported positive therapeutic benefits of neural mobilization, but due to limited methodological quality, the evidence remains weak. The review emphasized the need for further high-quality research on neural mobilization in stroke patients.
Study Gap: Despite the proven benefits of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation and neural mobilization in stroke rehabilitation, current literature largely examines these interventions in isolation. To date, up to the researcher's knowledge, no study has directly assessed the combined effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation and neural mobilization on hand grip strength and upper limb function in post-stroke patients. Additionally, there is limited evidence on standardized protocols for their integration in upper limb rehabilitation.
Given that Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation targets muscle activation and neural mobilization addresses nerve mobility, combining both may produce synergistic improvements in motor function of upper limb and hand grip. This study aims to fill this gap by evaluating the effectiveness of a combined approach, providing evidence-based strategies for optimizing stroke rehabilitation outcomes.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control group | Active comparator | Other: Conventional physical therapyParticipants in the control group received neural mobilization in combination with conventional physical therapy. Conventional rehabilitation consisted of standardized upper limb exercises, including ROM activities, strengthening exercises, stretching and task oriented training. |
| Experimental group | Experimental | Other: Neuromuscular Electrical StimulationParticipants in the experimental group received neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with upper limb neural mobilization. NMES was administrated using a frequency range of 35-50 Hz and a pulse duration of 250-300 µsec, with an on-off ratio of 1:3. The stimulation intensity was gradually increased until a visible muscle contraction was achieved. Neural mobilization was performed using standardized techniques targeting the median, radial and ulnar nerves. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 45 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Diagnosed with ischemic stroke (duration ≥ 3 months post-stroke)
- Patients with hemiparesis affecting the upper limb have a 15-30 score by the Fugl-Meyer Assessment.
- Medically stable for physical therapy
- Signed informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Patients with pacemakers or implanted electrical devices
- Upper limb fractures or contractures
- Skin allergies or wounds over the stimulation site
- Previously taking physiotherapy for the last 3 months.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional physical therapyAlso: Neural mobilization, Traditional physical therapyNeural mobilization for median, radial, and ulnar nerves. 3 sets of 10 repetitions per nerve for 15 mins with 30 sec rest. Progressed based on tolerance and Range of Motion. Conventional rehabilitation consisted of standardized upper limb exercises, including ROM activities, strengthening exercises, stretching and tsk oriented training. Each treatment session was conducted for 45 minutes. | Other | Control group |
| Neuromuscular Electrical StimulationAlso: Neural mobilizationNeuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) applied to wrist extensors and finger flexors. Frequency: 35 Hz. Pulse width: 250 µs. Duty cycle: 10s on / 20s off. Intensity: Visible muscle contraction, within patient tolerance. Duration: 30 min Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) + 15 min rest/cool-down. Neural mobilization for median, radial, and ulnar nerves. 3 sets of 10 repetitions per nerve with 30 sec rest. | Other | Experimental group |
Primary outcome
Handheld dynamometer
Time frame: Baseline and 6th week
The standard Jamar hydraulic handgrip dynamometer with reliability (ICC = 0.95-0.98) was used according to established ASHT (American Society of Hand Therapists) protocols for the measurement of hand grip strength. The patient was seated with shoulder adducted, elbow flexed at 90°, forearm neutral, and wrist 0-30° extension. A total of three trials (kg) with a 1-minute rest between trials was done, and the mean of the 3 values was recorded.
Goniometer
Time frame: baseline and 6th week
A clinically accepted instrument with high reliability (ICC: 0.85 - 0.99), in accordance with standardised assessment protocols. Each movement was measured across three trails with a 1-minute rest period between trails, and the average of the three readings (in degrees) was used for statistical analysis.
Fugl-Meyer Assessment - Upper Extremity
Time frame: Baseline and 6th week
The scale assesses motor recovery by observing movement patterns that advance from proximal to distal joints and from mass synergistic actions to more selective, isolated movements following a stroke. It consists of 4 sections: shoulder-arm, wrist, hand, and coordination and speed. It comprises 33 test items, each scored on a three-point ordinal scale (0-2) with a maximum achievable score of 66. In stroke patients the scale has revealed high reliability (ICC: 0.993 - 0.997).
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Jun 2026.
- Background: PubMed 35590144Crema A, Bassolino M, Guanziroli E, Colombo M, Blanke O, Serino A, Micera S, Molteni F. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation restores upper limb sensory-motor functions and body representations in chronic stroke survivors. Med. 2022 Jan 14;3(1):58-74.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.medj.2021.12.001. Epub 2022 Jan 7.
- BackgroundBaradie RSA. Neurodynamics and mobilization in Stroke Rehabilitation- A Systematic Review. Majmaah Journal of Health Sciences. 2020;5(2).
- Background: PubMed 32078796Micera S, Caleo M, Chisari C, Hummel FC, Pedrocchi A. Advanced Neurotechnologies for the Restoration of Motor Function. Neuron. 2020 Feb 19;105(4):604-620. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2020.01.039.
- Background: PubMed 32853287Eschle S, Hartmann K, Rieger A, Fischer S, Klima A, Bergmann M. Canine vaccination in Germany: A survey of owner attitudes and compliance. PLoS One. 2020 Aug 27;15(8):e0238371. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238371. eCollection 2020.
- Background: PubMed 33059433Saxena A, Sehgal S, Jangra MK. Effectiveness of Neurodynamic Mobilization versus Conventional Therapy on Spasticity Reduction and Upper Limb Function in Tetraplegic Patients. Asian Spine J. 2021 Aug;15(4):498-503. doi: 10.31616/asj.2020.0146. Epub 2020 Oct 19.
- BackgroundBadenhorst. A CASE STUDY TO DETERMINE THE EFFECT OF AN ACTIVITY-BASED NEUROMUSCULAR ELECTRICAL STIMULATION (NMES) PROGRAMME. 2020.
- Background: PubMed 34695957Crema A, Furfaro I, Raschella F, Rossini M, Zajc J, Wiesener C, Baccinelli W, Proserpio D, Augsten A, Immick N, Becker S, Weber M, Schauer T, Krakow K, Gasperini G, Molteni F, Russold MF, Bulgheroni M, Micera S. Reactive Exercises with Interactive Objects: Interim Analysis of a Randomized Trial on Task-Driven NMES Grasp Rehabilitation for Subacute and Early Chronic Stroke Patients. Sensors (Basel). 2021 Oct 11;21(20):6739. doi: 10.3390/s21206739.
- BackgroundChodijah S. THE EFFECT OF NEUROMUSCULAR ELECTRICAL STIMULATION (NMES) AND PROPRIOCEPTIVE NEUROMUSCULAR FACILITATION (PNF) IN INCREASING EXTREMITY MUSCLE STRENGTH OF HEMIPARESIS DEXTRA PATIENT: A CASE STUDY. Academic Physiotherapy Conference Proceeding. 2022;1.
- BackgroundHU Y. Effect of neural mobilization based on shoulder control training on shoulder pain and upper limb function in stroke patients with hemiplegia. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice. 2024;2.
- BackgroundSelvaraj. Dynamic Neural Mobilization Versus Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation on Grip Strength and UpperLimb Function in Sub-Acute Stroke Subjects. Indian Journal of Physiotherapy & Occupational Therapy. 2025;19(1)
- BackgroundZamurd D, Baig M. Neurodynamics for motor recovery after Stroke, a Review Article. 2023;17:1008.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Temporal Interference Stimulation for Upper-Limb Motor Recovery in Early Subacute Stroke
Acute Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
ELATE Study: Evaluating Large-vessel Acute Thrombectomy in Extended Time Window
Acute Ichemic Stroke
Recruiting
Web-Based Tele-Rehabilitation Using Action Observation and Mirror Therapy for Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Stroke, Upper Extremity Paresis
Recruiting
Early Motor-Cognitive Integrative Training on Cognitive and Motor Performance in Patients With Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Subarachnoid Aneurysm Hemorrhage
Not yet recruiting
Selective Intra-Arterial Hypothermia After Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion
Acute Ischemic Stroke, Basilar Artery Occlusion
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.
Hira Jabeen principal investigator
Riphah International University
Jabeen principal investigator
Riphah International University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Conventional physical therapy and Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in people with Stroke and Post Stroke Hand Rehabilitation, run by Riphah International University.
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 4 inclusion and 4 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: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Imran Amjad, Phd (03324390125, imran.amjad@riphah.edu.pk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Handheld dynamometer (time frame: Baseline and 6th week). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT07629908, which also lists 11 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 5 Jun 2026.