AI CuratorAI-generated
Research summary · AI summary · not yet reviewedHuman studyCase reportPublished in a peer-reviewed journal
Functional Electrical Stimulation in Adults with MS
A report on three adults (aged 39-62 years) with multiple sclerosis (MS) showed that all participants improved their gait speed when using functional electrical stimulation (FES) compared to not using a device or using ankle foot orthosis.
- Tags
- #MSResearch
- Most relevant to
- —
This plain-English summary was written by AI from a published abstract and may contain errors. It is not medical advice. Read the original study and talk to your MS team before making decisions about treatment.
- Human efficacy
- Not established from this source
- Mechanism
- Not reported
- Evidence strength
- Limited
- Outcome
- Not reported
Why it matters
Improving gait speed can enhance mobility and quality of life for individuals with MS, indicating that FES may be a useful intervention.
What this does not prove
This case report does not establish long-term effects of FES, and it lacks standardized guidelines for prescription or assessment of its efficacy.
Next milestone
No next milestone was established from the available source.
Study facts
- Study design
- Case report
- Participants / samples
- Not reported
- Randomised
- Not reported
- Controlled
- Not reported
- Primary endpoint met
- Not reported
- Relevant MS type
- Not reported
- Publication date
- 2026-03-16
- Evidence reviewed
- Abstract only
- Regulatory approval
- Not reported
- Research areas
- Not classified
- Biological target
- Not reported
- Pathway
- Not reported
- Population
- Adults with MS (age range, 39-62 years) with varying levels of lower extremity motor function and gait impairment.
- Size of effect
- > 0.1 m/s increase in gait speed
- Secondary endpoints
- Not reported
- MRI endpoints
- Not reported
- Biomarkers
- Not reported
- Safety
- Not reported
Original sources
- Primary evidenceUsing Wearable Sensors and Video Analysis to Improve Functional Electrical Stimulation Prescription in Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis: A Case Series. ↗DOI: 10.7224/1537-2073.2025-050
Supporting passages (13)
study phasePublication types: Case Reports; Journal Article
study designPublication types: Case Reports; Journal Article
subjectsMETHODS: Three adults (2 women, 1 man; age range, 39-62 years) with MS with varying levels of lower extremity motor function and gait impairment were enrolled.
interventionBACKGROUND: A growing body of evidence supports the use of functional electrical stimulation (FES) in people with multiple sclerosis (MS).
comparatorRESULTS: All participants demonstrated improvements in a variety of gait variables, including a clinically meaningful (> 0.1 m/s) increase in gait speed during 1 or more of the FES conditions when compared with the no-device and/or prescribed ankle foot orthosis conditions.
primary endpointRESULTS: All participants demonstrated improvements in a variety of gait variables, including a clinically meaningful (> 0.1 m/s) increase in gait speed during 1 or more of the FES conditions when compared with the no-device and/or prescribed ankle foot orthosis conditions.
findingsRESULTS: All participants demonstrated improvements in a variety of gait variables, including a clinically meaningful (> 0.1 m/s) increase in gait speed during 1 or more of the FES conditions when compared with the no-device and/or prescribed ankle foot orthosis conditions.
limitationsHowever, prescription remains an imprecise process with no well-established guidelines for assessing the immediate or long-term effects to ensure maximum benefit.
populationMETHODS: Three adults (2 women, 1 man; age range, 39-62 years) with MS with varying levels of lower extremity motor function and gait impairment were enrolled.
effect sizeRESULTS: All participants demonstrated improvements in a variety of gait variables, including a clinically meaningful (> 0.1 m/s) increase in gait speed during 1 or more of the FES conditions when compared with the no-device and/or prescribed ankle foot orthosis conditions.
publication datePublication date: 2026-03-16
peer reviewedPublication types: Case Reports; Journal Article
subjectsPublication types: Case Reports; Journal Article
AI assessment, not yet reviewed by a person · version 1 · Community votes are separate from evidence review.