國立虎尾科技大學 |

Electromyography Biofeedback Versus Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Improving Quadriceps Strength Post ACL Reconstruction : = A Systematic Review.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Electromyography Biofeedback Versus Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Improving Quadriceps Strength Post ACL Reconstruction :/
Reminder of title:	A Systematic Review.
Author:	Viray, Frederick.
Description:	1 online resource (70 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-01, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International86-01B.
Subject:	Physical therapy. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798383209127

Electromyography Biofeedback Versus Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Improving Quadriceps Strength Post ACL Reconstruction : = A Systematic Review.
Viray, Frederick.

Electromyography Biofeedback Versus Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Improving Quadriceps Strength Post ACL Reconstruction :A Systematic Review. - 1 online resource (70 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-01, Section: B.

Thesis (D.P.T.)--Azusa Pacific University, 2024.

Includes bibliographical references

Background. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions (ACLRs) are common within the athletic population in sports that require cutting, pivoting, and landing movements such as soccer, basketball, and football. These populations typically require physical therapy to address the persistent neuromuscular alterations that are associated with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Current modalities such as neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) and electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BF) are clinical tools used in rehabilitation to assist in returning the patient to pre-injury function or sport. The systematic review (SR) aimed to highlight the efficacy of EMG-BF versus NMES in developing quadriceps strength for patients undergoing ACLR. Similarly, the critically appraised topic (CAT) examined the efficacy of EMG-BF versus NMES in developing quadriceps strength for patients undergoing any knee arthroscopic surgeries such as meniscal or chondral procedures. Methods. Four reviewers conducted the SR through an independent search across seven databases including Cochrane Library, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Scholar, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), SPORTDiscus, and PubMed from September to October 2023. Inclusion criteria included literature published after 2010, ACLR patients, and modality intervention. Exclusion criteria included unrelated studies, non-English articles, animal studies, and patients with preexisting neuromuscular conditions. For the CAT, the same databases were used with the exception of CINAHL. Inclusion criteria included literature published after 2010 and knee arthroscopy patients. Exclusion criteria for the CAT were the same as the SR. Full-text articles for the SR and CAT searches were screened for relevant populations, interventions, and outcomes to our population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) question. The four researchers independently appraised each article via the PEDro scale from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database to assess the risk of bias. The primary statistics detailed in the SR were mean differences (MD) between groups, Cohen's d, and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The CAT assessed any statistically significant differences between the baseline and post intervention. Results. There is more evidence supporting NMES combined with conventional rehabilitation in comparison to EMG-BF combined with conventional rehabilitation for improving quadricep strength and knee function in post-ACLR patients. The CAT investigated three articles. There was no statistically significant difference between the use of EMG-BF versus NMES in treating post-knee arthroscopy patients. Therefore, either modality is effective in improving quadriceps strength in conjunction with conventional knee rehabilitation for this population. Conclusions. Both the SR and CAT exhibit valuable information in the use of NMES and EMG-BF for patients who have undergone an ACLR as well as knee arthroscopic surgeries in general. However, the limited sample size and duration of treatment in both the SR and CAT make it difficult to assess the long-term efficacy of either modality. Also, there is a lack of standardization between studies, specifically with modality treatment parameters. Therefore, recommendations for future research include standardizing approach to methodology to improve internal and external validity. Despite these limitations, good quality of evidence suggests that clinicians can confidently rely on either modality in developing quadricep strength for their ACLR patients.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798383209127Subjects--Topical Terms:

678370
Physical therapy.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Electromyographic biofeedbackIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Electromyography Biofeedback Versus Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Improving Quadriceps Strength Post ACL Reconstruction : = A Systematic Review.
LDR:05140ntm a22003857 4500 001 1151615
005 20241112095403.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2024 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798383209127
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI31336217
035 $a AAI31336217
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Viray, Frederick. $3 1478417
245 1 0 $a Electromyography Biofeedback Versus Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Improving Quadriceps Strength Post ACL Reconstruction : $b A Systematic Review.
264 0 $c 2024
300 $a 1 online resource (70 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 86-01, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Cole, Melissa.
502 $a Thesis (D.P.T.)--Azusa Pacific University, 2024.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Background. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions (ACLRs) are common within the athletic population in sports that require cutting, pivoting, and landing movements such as soccer, basketball, and football. These populations typically require physical therapy to address the persistent neuromuscular alterations that are associated with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Current modalities such as neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) and electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BF) are clinical tools used in rehabilitation to assist in returning the patient to pre-injury function or sport. The systematic review (SR) aimed to highlight the efficacy of EMG-BF versus NMES in developing quadriceps strength for patients undergoing ACLR. Similarly, the critically appraised topic (CAT) examined the efficacy of EMG-BF versus NMES in developing quadriceps strength for patients undergoing any knee arthroscopic surgeries such as meniscal or chondral procedures. Methods. Four reviewers conducted the SR through an independent search across seven databases including Cochrane Library, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Scholar, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), SPORTDiscus, and PubMed from September to October 2023. Inclusion criteria included literature published after 2010, ACLR patients, and modality intervention. Exclusion criteria included unrelated studies, non-English articles, animal studies, and patients with preexisting neuromuscular conditions. For the CAT, the same databases were used with the exception of CINAHL. Inclusion criteria included literature published after 2010 and knee arthroscopy patients. Exclusion criteria for the CAT were the same as the SR. Full-text articles for the SR and CAT searches were screened for relevant populations, interventions, and outcomes to our population, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) question. The four researchers independently appraised each article via the PEDro scale from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database to assess the risk of bias. The primary statistics detailed in the SR were mean differences (MD) between groups, Cohen's d, and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The CAT assessed any statistically significant differences between the baseline and post intervention. Results. There is more evidence supporting NMES combined with conventional rehabilitation in comparison to EMG-BF combined with conventional rehabilitation for improving quadricep strength and knee function in post-ACLR patients. The CAT investigated three articles. There was no statistically significant difference between the use of EMG-BF versus NMES in treating post-knee arthroscopy patients. Therefore, either modality is effective in improving quadriceps strength in conjunction with conventional knee rehabilitation for this population. Conclusions. Both the SR and CAT exhibit valuable information in the use of NMES and EMG-BF for patients who have undergone an ACLR as well as knee arthroscopic surgeries in general. However, the limited sample size and duration of treatment in both the SR and CAT make it difficult to assess the long-term efficacy of either modality. Also, there is a lack of standardization between studies, specifically with modality treatment parameters. Therefore, recommendations for future research include standardizing approach to methodology to improve internal and external validity. Despite these limitations, good quality of evidence suggests that clinicians can confidently rely on either modality in developing quadricep strength for their ACLR patients.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Physical therapy. $3 678370
650 4 $a Surgery. $3 644132
650 4 $a Kinesiology. $3 721210
653 $a Electromyographic biofeedback
653 $a Neuromuscular electrical stimulation
653 $a Critically appraised topic
653 $a Mean differences
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0382
690 $a 0576
690 $a 0575
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Azusa Pacific University. $b Physical Therapy. $3 1469154
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 86-01B.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=31336217 $z click for full text (PQDT)