Effects of A Combined Functional Electrical Stimulation with Action Observation Training for Balance and Gait Performance in Stroke Patients

동작관찰 신체훈련을 병행한 기능적 전기자극치료가 뇌졸중환자의 균형과 보행에 미치는 영향

Kang, Kwon-Young;Kim, Tae-Yoon

  • Received : 2016.04.06
  • Accepted : 2016.05.11
  • Published : 2016.05.31


PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the functional effects of action observation plus functional electrical stimulation (FES) treatment on the weight distribution indexes (heel and toe; right and left), stability indexes, gait velocities, and stride lengths of stroke patients. METHODS: The subjects, who were all more than six months post stroke, were randomly divided into two groups of ten each: an experimental group and a control group. TETRAX (Tetrax Interactive Balance System) and GAITRite (GAITRite$^{TM}$ computerized gait analysis system) were measured at baseline, six weeks after treatment. Participants in both the groups received functional electrical stimulation treatment, but the experimental group was provided with additional action observation. Independent t-tests were used to compare the differences between the groups, and repeated measured two-way ANOVA was used to compare the interaction between the groups. RESULTS: The result of the interactions between the groups and the periods showed significant increases in the weight distribution indexes (heel and toe; right and left), stability indexes, gait velocities and stride lengths (p<0.05). However, a comparison between the groups showed no significance in the weight distribution indexes (heel and toe), stability indexes, and stride lengths (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Action observation plus functional electrical stimulation treatment should be considered as a therapeutic method for physical therapy for stroke patients to improve the weight distribution indexes, stability indexes, gait velocities, and stride lengths.


Action observation;Balance;Gait;Stroke


  1. Aoyagi Y, Tsubahara A. Therapeutic orthosis and electrical stimulation for upper extremity hemiplegia after stroke: a review of effectiveness based on evidence. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2004;11(3):9-15.
  2. Atienza FL, Balaguer I, Garciia-Merita ML. Video modeling and imaging training on performance of tennis service of 9-to 12-year-old children. Percept Mot Skills. 1998;87(2):519-29.
  3. Bremner LA, Sloan KE, Day RE, et al. A clinical exercise system for paraplegics using functional electrical stimulation. Paraplegia. 1992;30(9):647-55.
  4. Buccino G, Solodkin A, Small SL. Functions of the mirror neuron system: implications for neurorehabilitation. Cogn Behav Neurol. 2006;19(1):55-63.
  5. Burridge J, Taylor P, Hagan S, et al. Experience of clinical use of the Odstock dropped foot stimulator. Artif Organs. 1997;21(3):254-60.
  6. Cho MS. The Effect on Ankle Joint Movement by FES Application on Tibialis Anterior Muscle in Chronic Stroke Patients. J Korean Soc Phys Med. 2011; 6(3):277-86.
  7. Choi JH, Park SH. The Effect of Weight Shifting and Motor Imagery Training on the Ability of Weight Shifting Task and Functional Activity in Stroke Patients. Journal of Special Education & Rehabilitation Science. 2009;48(4):169-82.
  8. Davis GM, Hamzaid NA, Fornusek C. Cardiorespiratory, metabolic, and biomechanical responses during functional electrical stimulation leg exercise: health and fitness benefits. Artif Organs. 2008;32(8):625-9.
  9. Di Fabio RP, Badke MB. Relationships of sensory organization to balance function in patients with hemiplegia. Phys Ther. 1990;70(9):542-8.
  10. Dijkerman HC, Ietswaart M, Johnston M, et al. Does motor imagery training improve hand function in chronic stroke patients? A pilot study. Clin Rehabil. 2004; 18(5):538-49.
  11. Han KJ. The Effect of 3D Image Action Observation on the Mirror Neuron Activity of Normal Subjects and People with Chronic Stroke. Doctor's Degree. Seonam University. 2012.
  12. Jackson PL, Lafleur MF, Malouin F, et al. Potential role of mental practice using motor imagery in neurologic rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82(8): 1133-41.
  13. Jenannerod M. Neural simulation of action: a unifying mechanism for motor cognition. Neuroimage. 2001; 14(1):103-9.
  14. Jin MR, Park CI, Park ES. Changes of muscle strength after functional electrical stimulation in complete paraplegia. J Korean Acad Rehab Med 1995;19(3):620-8.
  15. Johnson SH. Imagining the impossible: intact motor representations in hemiplegics. Neuroreport. 2000;11(4):729-32.
  16. Joseph J. A Discussion of Cybersickness in Virtual Environments SIGCHI Bulletin. 2000;32(1):47-56.
  17. Kang KY. Effects of Observed Action Gait Training on Spatio-temporal Parameter and Motivation of Rehabilitation in Stroke Patients. J Korean Soc Phys Med. 2013;8(3):351-60.
  18. Kim JM. Neuroanatomy & neurophysiology (4THed). Seoul. Jdmpub. 2011.
  19. Lee GC, Lee SM. Effects of Motor Imagery Training on Balance Ability in Poststroke. Journal of Special Education & Rehabilitation Science. 2010;49(1):113-31.
  20. Lee MG, Kim JM. The Effect of Action Observational Training on Arm Function in People With Stroke. Phys Ther Korea. 2011;18(2):27-34.
  21. Lee SY, Lee MH, Bae SS, et al. The effects of action observation and motor imagery of serial reaction time task(SRTT) in mirror neuron activation. J Korean Soc Phys Med. 2010;5(3):398-404.
  22. Lindquist AR, Prado CL, Barros RM, et al. Gait training combining partial body-weight support, a treadmill, and functional electrical stimulation: effects on poststroke gait. Phys Ther. 2007;87(9):1144-54.
  23. Lotze M, Cohen LG. Volition and imagery in neurorehabilitation. Cogn Behav Neurol. 2006;19(3): 135-40.
  24. Nichols DS. Balance retraining after stroke using force platform biofeedback. Phys Ther. 1997;77(5):553-8.
  25. Olsson CJ, Jonsson B, Nyberg L. Learning by Doing and Learning by Thinking: An fMRI Study of Combining Motor and Mental Training. Front Hum Neurosci. 2008;2(5):1-7.
  26. Park SH, Lee SM, Kim SB. The Influence of Motor Cortical Excitability on Visual Illusion Using Mirror, Motor Imagery and Action Observation. Korean Society of Sport Psychology. 2009;20(3):211-22.
  27. Popovic MR, Keller T. Modular transcutaneous functional electrical stimulation system. Med Eng Phy. 2005; 27(1):81-92.
  28. Rizzolatti G, Fadiga L, Gallese V, et al. Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 1996;3(2):131-41.
  29. Roure R, Collet C, Deschaumes-Molinaro C, et al. Imagery quality estimated by autonomic response is correlated to sporting performance enhancement. Physiol Behav. 1999;66(1):63-72.
  30. Tombaugh TN, McIntyre NJ. The mini-mental state examination: a comprehensive review. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1992;40(9):922-35.
  31. Yan T, Hui-Chan CW, Li LS. Functional electrical stimulation improves motor recovery of the lower extremity and walking ability of subjects with first acute stroke: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Stroke. 2005; 36(1):80-5.
  32. Yang CY, Kim TJ, Lee JH, et al. The Effect of Functional Electrical Stimulation on the Motor Function of Lower Limb in Hemiplegic Patients. Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2009;33(1):29-35.
  33. Yang YP, Kim JH, Han MR, et al. The Effect of Action Observation Training on Affected Side Upper Limb Dexterity in Stroke Patient: Single-subject research design. J Korean Soc Phys Med. 2012;7(1):111-8.
  34. Yoon JG, Kim MH, Yook DW. The Effects of Self-Controlled Learning on Balance in Hemiplegic. Phys Ther Korea. 2005;12(1):36-44.
  35. Ziemann U. TMS induced plasticity in human cortex. Rev Neurosci. 2004;15(4):253-66.


Supported by : 원광보건대학교