Effectiveness of Focal Muscle Vibrations in Improving Sensorimotor Performance, Mobility and Strength in Spinal Cord Injury Population: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord injury (SCI) results in debilitating sensory, functional deficits and paralysis requiring neurorehabilitation solutions. In this regard, focal muscle vibration (FMV) is an emerging neuro-rehabilitation tool that uses mechanical vibration on muscles/tendons to stimulate underlying nerves and consequently modulate neural pathways. We conducted a systematic review to understand the exact effectiveness of FMVs on the sensorimotor function and mobility/strength in the SCI population. DESIGN: Systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach. DATA SOURCES: PEDro, Springer, PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched through 15 February 2025. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included studies adhering to the following population-intervention-comparison-outcomes (PICO) elements. POPULATION: SCI, intervention: FMV, comparison: unexposed controls, outcome: either of sensorimotor function or mobility and strength. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search, screen and code included studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) scale. Findings were summarised and a narrative synthesis is provided. RESULTS: 25 studies were included. 9 studies used FMV in the upper limb and 14 in the lower limb. The analysis includes 427 patients with SCI, with a focus on male, chronic SCI cases and a prevalence of North American studies. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review of 25 studies, with 21 (84%) reporting positive outcomes, suggests that FMV may improve sensory perception, motor function, mobility and strength in individuals with SCIs, with benefits observed in both limbs. However, substantial heterogeneity in FMV parameters, study designs, participant characteristics and the high prevalence of serious/critical risk of bias (13/25 studies, 52%) limit definitive conclusions. Further research with optimised protocols, larger sample sizes and longitudinal designs is needed to confirm efficacy and establish clinical guidelines.