What question did this study set out to answer?

The review aims to assess the benefits and harms of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation compared to neuromuscular electrical stimulation for upper limb motor impairment after stroke.

April 12, 2026

Contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation for upper limb motor impairment in people after stroke

Key Points

The review aims to assess the benefits and harms of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation compared to neuromuscular electrical stimulation for upper limb motor impairment after stroke.
Cochrane Review protocol for analyzing intervention techniques
Comparison of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation and neuromuscular electrical stimulation
Evaluation of outcomes related to upper limb motor function
Assessment of both benefits and potential harms
Current literature suggests potential improvements in motor function with electrical stimulation techniques.
Comparative risks and benefits of CCFES versus NMES are yet to be fully explored.
Further studies are required to clarify relative effectiveness.

Abstract

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To evaluate the benefits and harms of contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation (CCFES) compared with neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for upper limb motor impairment in people after stroke.

Bookmark

Cite This Study

Aoki et al. (Fri,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69db37ca4fe01fead37c5d83 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd016280

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

Bookmark