Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation and motor responses in individuals with spinal cord injury: A methodological review

• Published in: PloS one 2021-11, Vol.16 (11), p.e0260166-e0260166
• Main Authors: Taylor, Clare, McHugh, Conor, Mockler, David, Minogue, Conor, Reilly, Richard B, Fleming, Neil
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animals; Biology and Life Sciences; Care and treatment; Criteria; Electric Stimulation - methods; Electric stimulation therapy; Electrical stimuli; Electrodes; Electromyography; Electrophysiological recording; Engineering and Technology; Evaluation; Funding; Human motion; Humans; Investigations; Medical libraries; Medicine; Medicine and Health Sciences; Methods; Motor activity; Motor Activity - physiology; Neurophysiology; Parameters; Recording; Research and Analysis Methods; Reviews; Spinal cord; Spinal Cord - physiopathology; Spinal cord injuries; Spinal Cord Injuries - physiopathology; Spinal Cord Injuries - therapy; Spinal cord injury; Spinal Cord Stimulation - methods; Spinal injuries; Stimulation; Systematic review
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260166

Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) is a non-invasive modality in which electrodes can stimulate spinal circuitries and facilitate a motor response. This review aimed to evaluate the methodology of studies using tSCS to generate motor activity in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) and to appraise the quality of included trials. A systematic search for studies published until May 2021 was made of the following databases: EMBASE, Medline (Ovid) and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and evaluated the quality of included trials. The electrical characteristics of stimulation were summarised to allow for comparison across studies. In addition, the surface electromyography (EMG) recording methods were evaluated. A total of 3753 articles were initially screened, of which 25 met the criteria for inclusion. Studies were divided into those using tSCS for neurophysiological investigations of reflex responses (n = 9) and therapeutic investigations of motor recovery (n = 16). The overall quality of evidence was deemed to be poor-to-fair (10.5 ± 4.9) based on the Downs and Black Quality Checklist criteria. The electrical characteristics were collated to establish the dosage range across stimulation trials. The methods employed by included studies relating to stimulation parameters and outcome measurement varied extensively, although some trends are beginning to appear in relation to electrode configuration and EMG outcomes. This review outlines the parameters currently employed for tSCS of the cervicothoracic and thoracolumbar regions to produce motor responses. However, to establish standardised procedures for neurophysiological assessments and therapeutic investigations of tSCS, further high-quality investigations are required, ideally utilizing consistent electrophysiological recording methods, and reporting common characteristics of the electrical stimulation administered.