The efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Files in This Item:
|The Efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation in adult cancer survivors.pdf||488.77 kB||Adobe PDF||Download|
|Title:||The efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis||Authors:||O'Connor, Dominic; Caulfield, Brian; Lennon, Olive||Permanent link:||http://hdl.handle.net/10197/10889||Date:||Dec-2018||Online since:||2019-07-11T11:32:50Z||Abstract:||Purpose: This study aims to (1) summarise and critically evaluate the effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) on indices of health and quality of life (QoL) in adult cancer survivors, (2) assess the safety of NMES as a rehabilitation method in this population, and (3) identify commonly used NMES treatment parameters and describe treatment progression. Methods: A systematic search of four electronic databases targeted studies evaluating the effects of NMES on physical function, aerobic fitness, muscle strength, body composition, and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) in adult cancer survivors, published through March 2018. Two reviewers independently reviewed and appraised the risk of bias of each study. Results: Nine studies were included. Meta-analyses found that the overall pooled effect favoured NMES for improving muscle strength, but the standardised mean difference was not significant (0.36; 95% CI − 0.25, 0.96). Further meta-analyses indicated that NMES significantly improved HR-QoL (0.36; 95% CI 0.10, 0.62), with notable gains identified under the subcategories QoL Function (0.87; 95% CI 0.32, 1.42). Current NMES prescription is not standardised and NMES is prescribed to target secondary complications of treatment. Risk of bias was high for most studies. Conclusions: NMES use in adult cancer survivors is an emerging field and current literature is limited by studies of poor quality and a lack of adequately powered RCTs. Existing evidence suggests that NMES is safe and may be more effective than usual care for improving HR-QoL. Prescription and progression should be tailored for the individual based on functional deficits.||Funding Details:||European Commission Horizon 2020||Type of material:||Journal Article||Publisher:||Springer||Journal:||Supportive Care in Cancer||Volume:||26||Issue:||12||Start page:||3985||End page:||4000||Copyright (published version):||2018 Springer||Keywords:||Neuromuscular electrical stimulation; Adult cancer survivors; Rehabilitation; Oncology; Physical function||DOI:||10.1007/s00520-018-4342-7||Language:||en||Status of Item:||Peer reviewed|
|Appears in Collections:||Insight Research Collection|
Show full item record
This item is available under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland. No item may be reproduced for commercial purposes. For other possible restrictions on use please refer to the publisher's URL where this is made available, or to notes contained in the item itself. Other terms may apply.