Acute and chronic neuromuscular electrical stimulation and postural balance: a review

Electromyostimulation Application on Peroneus Longus Muscle Improves Balance and Strength in American Football Players

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of 5 weeks of electromyostimulation (EMS) of the peroneus longus muscle on balance and muscle strength in American Football (AmF) players.

METHODS

Thirty-two healthy male athletes (4 American Football team training sessions per week, college level) were randomly divided into the EMS and control groups. The EMS applications were conducted on the dominant peroneus longus muscle 3 times per week for 5 weeks, with each application lasting 25 minutes. Before and after the interventions, the strength of ankle dorsiflexion-plantar flexion and foot eversion-inversion was measured with isometric dynamometer and anterior-posterior sway, mediolateral sway, perimeter, and ellipse area were measured with the Technobody Balance System in unilateral stance positions, while eyes were open.

RESULTS

Changes between initial and final tests for dorsiflexion and eversion strength, and mediolateral sway for dynamic balance in the groups were significantly different (P = .039, P = .027, P = .030, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The EMS application had positive effects on muscle strength and dynamic balance of AmF players. The EMS can be used to improve isometric strength and dynamic balance in AmF players.

Neuromuscular or Sensory Electrical Stimulation for Reconditioning Motor Output and Postural Balance in Older Subjects?

Percutaneous electrical stimulation is used for reconditioning functional capabilities in older subjects. However, its optimal application depends on the specific physiological needs of the individual. Depending on whether his/her needs are related to motor function or sensory and central functions, the relevant modality of electrical stimulation differs significantly. In fact, there are two main modalities of electrical stimulation, that is, neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) and sensory electrical stimulation (SES). NMES involves high-intensity currents (above the motor threshold) and provokes involuntary visible direct muscle contractions. With chronic application, the induced adaptations occur mainly at the neuromuscular function level and thus enhance muscle strength/power and motor output. SES involves low-intensity currents (below, at or only just above the sensory threshold), does not induce any visible muscle contraction and provides only sensory information. With chronic application, the induced adaptations occur at the level of potentiation and transmission of proprioceptive afferents and thus facilitate sensorimotor activity (movement and balance). Overall, SES is interesting for the improvement/maintenance of sensorimotor capabilities in non-frail older subjects while NMES is relevant to develop muscle strength/power and thus reduce the risk of falls due to a lack of muscle strength/power in frail older subjects.

Sensory electrical stimulation and postural balance: a comprehensive review

PURPOSE

Sensory electrical stimulation (SES)-i.e., low-intensity electrical currents below, at, or just above the sensory threshold but below the motor threshold-is mainly used to restore/improve postural balance in pathological and healthy subjects. However, the ins and outs of its application as well as the neurophysiological effects induced are not yet well known. Hence, the aim of this paper was to address the effects of SES on postural balance based on these considerations.

METHOD

The immediate/concurrent effects (SES applied during postural balance measurements), the acute effects (SES durably applied before measuring postural balance) and the chronic effects (SES included in training/rehabilitation programs, i.e., measurements performed before and after the programs) were analysed with a comprehensive review.

RESULT

SES can lead to the improvement of postural balance using any of the three applications (immediate/concurrent, acute and chronic), notably in pathological subjects. The beneficial effects of SES can take place at the peripheral (sensory receptors sensitivity), spinal (spinal motoneural excitablity) and supra-spinal (cortex reorganisation or adaptation) levels. In healthy subjects, SES appears interesting, but too few studies have been conducted with this population to report clear results. Moreover, the literature is relatively devoid of comparative studies about the characteristics of the stimulation current (e.g., location, current parameters, duration).

CONCLUSION

In practice, SES appears to be particularly useful to reinforce or restore the postural function in the immediate/concurrent, acute or chronic application in pathlogical populations while its effects should be confirmed in healthy sujects by future studies. Moreover, future research should focus on the different characteristics of stimulation.

Cutaneous and muscular afferents from the foot and sensory fusion processing: Physiology and pathology in neuropathies

The foot-sole cutaneous receptors (section 2), their function in stance control (sway minimisation, exploratory role) (2.1), and the modulation of their effects by gait pattern and intended behaviour (2.2) are reviewed. Experimental manipulations (anaesthesia, temperature) (2.3 and 2.4) have shown that information from foot sole has widespread influence on balance. Foot-sole stimulation (2.5) appears to be a promising approach for rehabilitation. Proprioceptive information (3) has a pre-eminent role in balance and gait. Reflex responses to balance perturbations are produced by both leg and foot muscle stretch (3.1) and show complex interactions with skin input at both spinal and supra-spinal levels (3.2), where sensory feedback is modulated by posture, locomotion and vision. Other muscles, notably of neck and trunk, contribute to kinaesthesia and sense of orientation in space (3.3). The effects of age-related decline of afferent input are variable under different foot-contact and visual conditions (3.4). Muscle force diminishes with age and sarcopenia, affecting intrinsic foot muscles relaying relevant feedback (3.5). In neuropathy (4), reduction in cutaneous sensation accompanies the diminished density of viable receptors (4.1). Loss of foot-sole input goes along with large-fibre dysfunction in intrinsic foot muscles. Diabetic patients have an elevated risk of falling, and vision and vestibular compensation strategies may be inadequate (4.2). From Charcot-Marie-Tooth 1A disease (4.3) we have become aware of the role of spindle group II fibres and of the anatomical feet conditions in balance control. Lastly (5) we touch on the effects of nerve stimulation onto cortical and spinal excitability, which may participate in plasticity processes, and on exercise interventions to reduce the impact of neuropathy.

Effect of the application of somatosensory and excitomotor electrical stimulation during quiet upright standing balance

Somatosensory (which activates sensory neurons only) and excitomotor (which activates both motoneurons and sensory neurons) electrical stimulations applied on the musculature of the lower-limb are likely to facilitate and disturb balance control respectively. The aim of this study was to compare the possible balance control modifications induced by somatosensory (SS) and excitomotor (EX) electrical stimulations applied on the quadriceps femoris in quiet standing condition. Kinetics and kinematics parameters were recorded with a force platform (displacements of center of foot pressure) and a 3D analysis system (hip, knee and ankle angles) respectively during a postural task. Twenty healthy young male participants carried out a monopedal postural task (i.e., unilateral stance) in three conditions: SS stimulation (1ms; 10Hz; 7±2 mA i.e., twice the intensity corresponding to the sensory threshold), EX stimulation (400 µs; 50 Hz; 20 ± 5 mA i.e., twice the intensity corresponding to the motor threshold), and a control (CONT) condition without stimulation. The results showed no significant differences between the three conditions except for the knee' angle which was higher in the EX condition (167.3±11.6 vs 164.3±5.8 and 163.9±8) (p < 0.005) than in the two other conditions (SS stimulation and CONT). This means that the EX stimulation induced a postural position change (i.e., a slight knee extension) during the monopedal postural task without altering balance control. Overall, on the basis of the stimulation parameters used in the present work, neither the SS stimulation, nor the EX stimulation facilitated or disturbed postural balance.