Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool. 28Data synthesis: Nineteen studies (described in 20 articles) recruiting 490 pwMS were identified and rated moderate or weak, with 29 none gaining a strong rating. All studies rated weak for blinding. Initial and ongoing orthotic and therapeutic effects were assessed 30 with regards to the impact of FES on gait speed in short and long walking tests. Meta-analyses of the short walk tests revealed a 31 significant initial orthotic effect (t = 2.14, p = 0.016) with a mean increase in gait speed of 0.05 meters per second (m/s) and 32 ongoing orthotic effect (t = 2.81, p = 0.003) with a mean increase of 0.08m/s. There were no initial or ongoing effect on gait speed 33 in long walk tests and no therapeutic effect on gait speed in either short or long walk tests.

Objective: To compare the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) and functional electrical stimulation (FES) over 12 months in people with Multiple Sclerosis with foot drop. Design: Multicentre, powered, non-blinded, randomized trial. Setting: Seven Multiple Sclerosis outpatient centres across Scotland. Subjects: Eighty-five treatment-naïve people with Multiple Sclerosis with persistent (>three months) foot drop. Interventions: Participants randomized to receive a custom-made, AFO (n = 43) or FES device (n = 42). Outcome measures: Assessed at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months; 5-minute self-selected walk test (primary), Timed 25 Foot Walk, oxygen cost of walking, Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29, Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12, Modified Fatigue Impact Scale, Euroqol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, Activities-specific Balance and Confidence Scale, Psychological Impact of Assistive Devices Score, and equipment and National Health Service staff time costs of interventions. Results: Groups were similar for age (AFO, 51.4 (11.2); FES, 50.4(10.4) years) and baseline walking speed (AFO, 0.62 (0.21); FES 0.73 (0.27) m/s). In all, 38% dropped out by 12 months (AFO, n = 21; FES, n = 11). Both groups walked faster at 12 months with device (P < 0.001; AFO, 0.73 (0.24); FES, 0.79 (0.24) m/s) but no difference between groups. Significantly higher Psychological Impact of Assistive Devices Scores were found for FES for Competence (P = 0.016; AFO, 0.85(1.05); FES, 1.53(1.05)), Adaptability (P = 0.001; AFO, 0.38(0.97); FES 1.53 (0.98)) and Self-Esteem (P = 0.006; AFO, 0.45 (0.67); FES 1 (0.68)). Effects were comparable for other measures. FES may offer value for money alternative to usual care. Conclusion: AFOs and FES have comparable effects on walking performance and patient-reported outcomes; however, high drop-outs introduces uncertainty.

Background Foot drop affects walking in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). This study compares the initial orthotic effects of two treatments for foot drop: ankle-foot orthoses (AFO) and functional electrical stimulation (FES), on the speed and oxygen cost of walking in MS. Method and materials Seventy-eight pwMS were randomised to receive AFO or FES (ODFS PACE (OML, Salisbury, UK)). Participants completed the 25-ft walk test (25ftWT) and 5-min self-selected walk test (5minSSWT), from which oxygen cost was determined, with and without their device. Between-, within- and sub-group analyses (based on baseline walking speed of <0.8 m/s (slow) or ≥0.8 m/s (fast)) were undertaken. Results No significant differences between baseline measures were observed. The AFO group walked significantly slower than the FES group (5minSSWT, p = 0.037, 0.11 m/s). The AFO group walked significantly slower with than without AFO (25ftWT, p = 0.037), particularly in the fast-walking group ( p = 0.011). The slow-walking FES group walked significantly faster with FES than without (25ftWT; p = 0.029, 5minSSWT; p = 0.037). There were no differences in the fast-walking FES group or in the oxygen cost for either device. Conclusion AFO reduced walking speed, particularly in fast walkers. FES increased walking speed in slow, but not fast walkers.

 Implications for Rehabilitation  People with Multiple Sclerosis using functional electrical stimulation report benefits in many aspects of walking, improved psychological well-being and increased engagement in valued activities. 2  A number of challenges impact on functional electrical stimulation use. Factors such as; a positive experience using the device, access to professional help, the influence of others, a strong sense of personal autonomy and an individual's ability to adapt, influence an individual's decision to continue using functional electrical stimulation.  Clinicians prescribing functional electrical stimulation should be aware of these factors so that the right support and guidance can be provided to people with Multiple Sclerosis, thus improving outcomes and compliance over the long term.

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a common degenerative neurologic condition resulting in walking difficulties. Foot drop is a common walking impairment in MS that can affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Functional electrical stimulation (FES) can improve walking in people with MS, but its effect on HRQOL is not well established. This review investigated the effect of FES used for foot drop on HRQOL in adults with MS. Methods: A systematic search was performed using CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and PEDro online databases. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select eligible studies. Data were extracted, and two reviewers independently rated the quality of the studies using the Effective Public Health Practice Project assessment tool. Results: Eight studies were eligible for review; seven were of moderate-to-strong methodological quality and one was weak. Seven studies demonstrated significant positive effects of FES on different aspects of HRQOL as measured by the 29-item Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale, 36-item Short Form Health Status Survey, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, and Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale. Conclusions: This review provides preliminary evidence that FES has a positive effect on aspects of HRQOL in people with MS; however, the variety of HRQOL outcomes used makes it difficult to determine definitive conclusions. Future larger-scale randomized studies with long-term follow-up are recommended to better understand the effect of FES on HRQOL. This will inform prescribing decisions and support compliance with FES over the longer-term.