Electromagnetic network-targeted field (ENTF) therapy combined with physical therapy significantly reduces overall disability in stroke survivors compared to inactive—or ‘sham’—electromagnetic stimulation plus physical therapy, according to a preliminary study set to be presented at the 2026 International Stroke Conference (ISC; 4–6 February, New Orleans, USA).
According to researchers, ENTF therapy represents a promising treatment option involving electrical stimulation of the interconnected networks relating to motor movement, cognitive functions and other brain activities.
“These neural networks show electrical disorganisation after a stroke,” explained lead study author Jeffrey Saver (University of California Los Angeles [UCLA], Los Angeles, USA). “Stimulating these networks with electromagnetic pulse patterns derived from studies in people who have not had a stroke can model and facilitate the re-establishment of normal network organisation. This therapy has shown beneficial effects upon organised brain electrical activity and, most importantly, was associated with improved functional recovery for patients after stroke.”
Researchers examined the combined data from two double-blinded, randomised, sham-controlled studies—the BQ3 and EMAGINE trials conducted between 2021 and 2025—to characterise the potential effects of ENTF therapy on reducing disability after ischaemic stroke. EMAGINE was published in JAMA Network Open last year, with investigators concluding that further research was required after the trial was ended early due to a planned interim analysis indicating that the results were “not sufficiently promising” to expand the initial sample size.
In total, 124 stroke survivors (average age, 58 years; 31% women) were included in the present analysis; 65 treated with ENTF therapy and 59 receiving sham treatment. Participants were enrolled in the study on average 14 days after their stroke occurred and were moderately to severely disabled, with an average modified Rankin scale (mRS) score of 3.9 at enrolment.
All participants received 40–45 sessions of ENTF therapy or sham treatment over the course of 8–12 weeks, and both groups received physical therapy during their stimulation sessions. Additionally, in both trials, participants began ENTF therapy in the hospital and continued with at-home treatments using portable kits. Participants were assessed for overall disability as well as motor and cognitive abilities after three months of treatment, with the primary outcome of interest being an mRS score of 0–1.
Saver and colleagues’ analysis ultimately found that the percentage of participants who achieved freedom from disability was 22% higher in the ENTF group compared to the sham group (33.8% vs 11.9%, respectively). Measurable improvements were also seen in ENTF participants’ disability levels across a full range of outcomes, including both moderate to severe (mRS 3–5) and less moderate (mRS 2) disability. Furthermore, no serious adverse effects were reported among participants who received ENTF therapy.
“It’s clear that we need more effective rehabilitation therapies to fully improve patient outcomes,” Saver added. “This promising potential therapy is unique in that it would be able to be conducted at home by the stroke survivor using a portable kit.”
“This study examines two small trials of ENTF therapy for stroke patients,” commented American Stroke Association (ASA) volunteer expert Joseph Broderick (University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, USA), who was not involved in the study. “The results are preliminary, highlighting the need for larger trials with balanced participant groups to assess the therapy’s effectiveness. ENTF showed no safety issues, and there’s a strong demand for new recovery methods post-stroke.”
The researchers also acknowledge that the main limitation of this study is that it is an analysis of data from two small pilot studies, and, as such, a single, larger trial is needed to confirm these results. Broderick described the results as “exciting” but also “very preliminary”, stating that the orchestration of a well-powered and bigger study is an “obvious next step”.
“We’ve made so much progress in stroke therapy and prevention over the last 30–40 years, but I really and truly believe that the next century is about how we recover from stroke and brain injury,” he continued. “And that’s going to require us doing great research—hopefully patients participate in that research—so we can find better ways to help people recover.”
