Skip to main content

Table 4 Main outcomes from studies measuring evoked force in ICU patients

From: Bedside voluntary and evoked forces evaluation in intensive care unit patients: a narrative review

References Muscle Stimulation technique Number of patients (controls) Duration of ICU stay or MV$ (days [range]) Main results
Finn et al. [12] Adductor Pollicis ES 44 (26) 9.5 [0–38] F10/F50* ratio was higher in patients than in controls
Harris et al. [13]   ES & MS 12 (38) 18.5 [1–89] Force was 40% lower in patients as compared with controls
Eikermann et al. [55]   ES 13 (7) 13.5 [5–23]$ Force was 69% lower in patients as compared with controls
Connolly et al. [15]   ES 21 13 [9–25] Force was lower within the 24 h of admission in patients as compared with control values obtained in healthy subjects
Force remained unchanged when recorded 7 days after the initial measurements
Ginz et al. [56] Ankle
Dorsiflexors
ES 19 (20) 7 [N/A] Force was 20–40% lower in patients as compared with controls
Ginz et al. [60]   ES 8 5 [2–10] Force decreased during the ICU stay and recovered after weaning of MV in ICU survivors
Silva et al. [14] Quadriceps ES# 30 (30) 23 [15–26] Force decreased by ~ 25 and ~ 36% after 14 days of MV
Laghi et al. [58]   MS 12 (50) 9.9 [1–22]$ Force was 54% lower in patients as compared with controls
Vivodtzev et al. [61]   MS 13 (8) 7 [N/A] Force was 75% lower in patients as compared with controls
  1. *F10/F50: ratio between the forces produced by a 10 Hz stimulation train to the force produced by a 50 Hz stimulation train
  2. #Electrical stimulation was applied over the quadriceps muscle belly; ES: electrical stimulation; MS: magnetic stimulation; MV: mechanical ventilation; N/A: Not available