↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

A novel nonpharmacological intervention – breathing-controlled electrical stimulation for neuropathic pain management after spinal cord injury – a preliminary study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
A novel nonpharmacological intervention – breathing-controlled electrical stimulation for neuropathic pain management after spinal cord injury – a preliminary study
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, November 2016
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s115901
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shengai Li, Matthew Davis, Joel E Frontera, Sheng Li

Abstract

The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a novel nonpharmacological intervention - breathing-controlled electrical stimulation (BreEStim) - for neuropathic pain management in spinal cord injury (SCI) patients. There were two experiments: 1) to compare the effectiveness between BreEStim and conventional electrical stimulation (EStim) in Experiment (Exp) 1 and 2) to examine the dose-response effect of BreEStim in Exp 2. In Exp 1, 13 SCI subjects (6 males and 7 females, history of SCI: 58.2 months, from 7 to 150 months, impairments ranging from C4 AIS B to L1 AIS B) received both BreEStim and EStim in a randomized order with at least 3 days apart. A total of 120 electrical stimuli to the median nerve transcutaneously were triggered by voluntary inhalation during BreEStim or were randomly delivered during EStim. In Exp 2, a subset of 7 subjects received BreEStim120 and 240 stimuli randomly on two different days with 7 days apart (BreEStim120 vs BreEStim240). The primary outcome variable was the visual analog scale (VAS) score. In Exp 1, both BreEStim and EStim showed significant analgesic effects. Reduction in VAS score was significantly greater after BreEStim (2.6±0.3) than after EStim (0.8±0.3) (P<0.001). The duration of analgesic effect was significantly longer after BreEStim (14.2±6 hours) than after EStim (1.9±1 hours) (P=0.04). In Exp 2, BreEStim120 and BreEStim240 had similar degree and duration of analgesic effects. The findings from this preliminary study suggest that BreEStim is an effective alternative nonpharmacological treatment for chronic neuropathic pain in patients suffering from SCI.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Master 6 13%
Researcher 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 17 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 20 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#1,316
of 1,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,216
of 317,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#37
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,808 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.