Key result
Low-frequency electrical muscle stimulation fails to improve 6-minute walk distance vs sham in severe HF.
Why the study?
Does low-frequency electrical muscle stimulation improve 6 min walk distance and feasibility outcomes in patients with severe heart failure?
Population
60 patients with severe heart failure having left ventricular ejection fraction <40% documented by…
Comparison
Low-frequency electrical muscle stimulation of… vs Sham placebo of the quadriceps and hamstrings…
Design
RCT, randomised, Double blind
Follow-up
8 weeks
Authors
Loading...
Does not support LF-EMS for severe HF; feasibility RCT leaves open questions on dosing or subgroups.
RCT (n=60)
Double blind (participants, outcome assessors)
remotely by computer
No
Does low-frequency electrical muscle stimulation improve 6 min walk distance and feasibility outcomes in patients with severe heart failure?
p-value: p=0.13
A feasibility trial of low-frequency electrical muscle stimulation in advanced heart failure showed it is tolerable but yielded no significant improvements in exercise capacity or quality of life.
Ennis et al. (2017) conducted an RCT in severe heart failure (n=60). Low-frequency electrical muscle stimulation (LF-EMS) vs. sham placebo (skin level stimulation only) was evaluated on 6 min walk distance (p=0.13). Low-frequency electrical muscle stimulation for 8 weeks did not significantly improve 6-minute walk distance compared to sham placebo in patients with severe heart failure (p=0.13).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: