34%) increased in comparison to that of peroneal FES alone (24.75 �� 7.32%, P = 0.005) (see Figure 2). At T2, the gait asymmetry index, a marker of gait stability, improved by 8% from 0.43 �� 0.26 to 0.40 �� 0.30 (P selleck catalog = 0.006) (see Figure 3). Figure 2Effects of FES on gait asymmetry.Figure 3Effects of FES on single-limb stance percentage.Wilcoxon’s matched pairs test comparing performance with dual-channel FES at T1 and T2 showed significant improvements at T2 in both outcomes of gait velocity (two-minute gait speed and obstacle course gait velocity; P < 0.0001 for both measures). A clear trend of training effect was found for the single-limb stance percentage (P = 0.018; after applying Bonferroni correction significance was set to P = 0.0125), while the gait asymmetry did not change (P = 0.

132).3.3. User AcceptanceTable 3 summarizes the subjects’ perceptions regarding usability of the peroneal and thigh FES system. All patients described the system as safe for use, and 87% were enthusiastic about continuing to use it. Furthermore, 93% of the subjects described their walking ability as better or significantly better while using the dual-channel system; 78% reported more confidence in walking; 84% felt greater confidence in walking on inclines and/or uneven ground while using the system. As can be seen in Table 3, the majority of the subjects were satisfied with the ease of adjusting the system (84%), reporting that it was not difficult to place the cuff in the correct position on the thigh and leg and that they rarely needed assistance with operating the system after the initial training (69%).

Moreover, most of the participants (76%) found the system to be comfortable for all-day use and that it allowed them to perform more daily tasks and activities. Eleven patients reported a mild skin abrasion under the cuff, but all such cases were resolved after readjustment of the cuff’s straps. Skin irritation under the stimulation electrodes was neither reported nor observed. Table 3Summary of the subject’s acceptance questionnaire.4. DiscussionThe study’s findings suggest that dual-channel FES, applied daily to the peroneal nerve and thigh muscle by individuals with hemiparesis, positively affects gait performance. The beneficial effects of this dual-channel application were superior to those obtained by peroneal stimulation alone, which is the most common application of FES in this population.

To our knowledge, the present study is the first to document these advantages.Significant advantages were demonstrated when comparing the gait speed achieved with the dual-channel FES and those achieved with peroneal Dacomitinib stimulation alone (Tables (Tables11 and and2).2). It is well accepted that improving gait speed is an important rehabilitation goal [21] and that increased gait velocity is associated with better function and quality of life [6].