The efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis
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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Supportive care in cancer 2018-12, Vol.26 (12), p.3985-4000 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 4000 |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | 3985 |
container_title | Supportive care in cancer |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | O’Connor, Dominic Caulfield, Brian Lennon, Olive |
description | 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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00520-018-4342-7 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2072182237</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A560045324</galeid><sourcerecordid>A560045324</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c548t-3c2d5221f0237a43b043b3054e3edf7b5a23073d326cb6b69a7d352dd485db9c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kstuFDEQRS0EIkPgA9ggS2zCokP51Z5hF0XhIQVYENaW264Ojrrtwe6eaD6Cf8YzE54CWZalqlO3yvYl5CmDUwagXxYAxaEBtmykkLzR98iCSSEaLcTqPlnASrKaUeqIPCrlBoBprfhDciQAOBeyXZBvV1-QYt8HZ92W2ujpOmNxOaynkCJNPY045zTOxc2DzRQHdFOu9EDLFMYa23MnH95ffHpBQ6TWz8NEnY0OMy1z3oRNyuUVtbRsy4Rj5R3NuAl4u2834mQbG-2wLaE8Jg96OxR8cncek8-vL67O3zaXH9-8Oz-7bJySy6kRjnvFOeuBC22l6KBuAUqiQN_rTlkuQAsveOu6tmtXVnuhuPdyqXy3cuKYnBx01zl9nbFMZgzF4TDYiGkuhoPmbFmfSFf0-V_oTZpznXdPMQntSv1GXdsBTYh9mrJ1O1FzploAqQSXlTr9B1WXxzG4FLEPNf5HATsUuJxKydibdQ6jzVvDwOwsYA4WMNUCZmcBsxvl2d3Aczei_1nx488rwA9Aqal4jfnXjf6v-h1Rd7tI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2071406957</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>O’Connor, Dominic ; Caulfield, Brian ; Lennon, Olive</creator><creatorcontrib>O’Connor, Dominic ; Caulfield, Brian ; Lennon, Olive</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0941-4355</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1433-7339</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00520-018-4342-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30022346</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Adult ; Analysis ; Cancer ; Cancer research ; Cancer survivors ; Cancer Survivors - psychology ; Disease Progression ; Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods ; Evidence-based medicine ; Humans ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Meta-analysis ; Neuromuscular electrical stimulation ; Nursing ; Nursing Research ; Oncology ; Pain Medicine ; Physiological aspects ; Quality of life ; Quality of Life - psychology ; Rehabilitation Medicine ; Review Article ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Supportive care in cancer, 2018-12, Vol.26 (12), p.3985-4000</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2018 Springer</rights><rights>Supportive Care in Cancer is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c548t-3c2d5221f0237a43b043b3054e3edf7b5a23073d326cb6b69a7d352dd485db9c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c548t-3c2d5221f0237a43b043b3054e3edf7b5a23073d326cb6b69a7d352dd485db9c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3054-0636</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00520-018-4342-7$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00520-018-4342-7$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30022346$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>O’Connor, Dominic</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caulfield, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lennon, Olive</creatorcontrib><title>The efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>Supportive care in cancer</title><addtitle>Support Care Cancer</addtitle><addtitle>Support Care Cancer</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Cancer research</subject><subject>Cancer survivors</subject><subject>Cancer Survivors - psychology</subject><subject>Disease Progression</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods</subject><subject>Evidence-based medicine</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Neuromuscular electrical stimulation</subject><subject>Nursing</subject><subject>Nursing Research</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Pain Medicine</subject><subject>Physiological aspects</subject><subject>Quality of life</subject><subject>Quality of Life - psychology</subject><subject>Rehabilitation Medicine</subject><subject>Review Article</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>0941-4355</issn><issn>1433-7339</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kstuFDEQRS0EIkPgA9ggS2zCokP51Z5hF0XhIQVYENaW264Ojrrtwe6eaD6Cf8YzE54CWZalqlO3yvYl5CmDUwagXxYAxaEBtmykkLzR98iCSSEaLcTqPlnASrKaUeqIPCrlBoBprfhDciQAOBeyXZBvV1-QYt8HZ92W2ujpOmNxOaynkCJNPY045zTOxc2DzRQHdFOu9EDLFMYa23MnH95ffHpBQ6TWz8NEnY0OMy1z3oRNyuUVtbRsy4Rj5R3NuAl4u2834mQbG-2wLaE8Jg96OxR8cncek8-vL67O3zaXH9-8Oz-7bJySy6kRjnvFOeuBC22l6KBuAUqiQN_rTlkuQAsveOu6tmtXVnuhuPdyqXy3cuKYnBx01zl9nbFMZgzF4TDYiGkuhoPmbFmfSFf0-V_oTZpznXdPMQntSv1GXdsBTYh9mrJ1O1FzploAqQSXlTr9B1WXxzG4FLEPNf5HATsUuJxKydibdQ6jzVvDwOwsYA4WMNUCZmcBsxvl2d3Aczei_1nx488rwA9Aqal4jfnXjf6v-h1Rd7tI</recordid><startdate>20181201</startdate><enddate>20181201</enddate><creator>O’Connor, Dominic</creator><creator>Caulfield, Brian</creator><creator>Lennon, Olive</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3054-0636</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20181201</creationdate><title>The efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>O’Connor, Dominic ; Caulfield, Brian ; Lennon, Olive</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c548t-3c2d5221f0237a43b043b3054e3edf7b5a23073d326cb6b69a7d352dd485db9c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Cancer research</topic><topic>Cancer survivors</topic><topic>Cancer Survivors - psychology</topic><topic>Disease Progression</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods</topic><topic>Evidence-based medicine</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Neuromuscular electrical stimulation</topic><topic>Nursing</topic><topic>Nursing Research</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Pain Medicine</topic><topic>Physiological aspects</topic><topic>Quality of life</topic><topic>Quality of Life - psychology</topic><topic>Rehabilitation Medicine</topic><topic>Review Article</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>O’Connor, Dominic</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caulfield, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lennon, Olive</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Supportive care in cancer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>O’Connor, Dominic</au><au>Caulfield, Brian</au><au>Lennon, Olive</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Supportive care in cancer</jtitle><stitle>Support Care Cancer</stitle><addtitle>Support Care Cancer</addtitle><date>2018-12-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>3985</spage><epage>4000</epage><pages>3985-4000</pages><issn>0941-4355</issn><eissn>1433-7339</eissn><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.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>30022346</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00520-018-4342-7</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3054-0636</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0941-4355 |
ispartof | Supportive care in cancer, 2018-12, Vol.26 (12), p.3985-4000 |
issn | 0941-4355 1433-7339 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2072182237 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Adult Analysis Cancer Cancer research Cancer survivors Cancer Survivors - psychology Disease Progression Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods Evidence-based medicine Humans Medicine Medicine & Public Health Meta-analysis Neuromuscular electrical stimulation Nursing Nursing Research Oncology Pain Medicine Physiological aspects Quality of life Quality of Life - psychology Rehabilitation Medicine Review Article Systematic review |
title | The efficacy and prescription of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T12%3A54%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20efficacy%20and%20prescription%20of%20neuromuscular%20electrical%20stimulation%20(NMES)%20in%20adult%20cancer%20survivors:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Supportive%20care%20in%20cancer&rft.au=O%E2%80%99Connor,%20Dominic&rft.date=2018-12-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=3985&rft.epage=4000&rft.pages=3985-4000&rft.issn=0941-4355&rft.eissn=1433-7339&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00520-018-4342-7&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA560045324%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2071406957&rft_id=info:pmid/30022346&rft_galeid=A560045324&rfr_iscdi=true |