Dataset Information

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation vs Sham Stimulation to Treat Aphasia After Stroke: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Aphasia is a debilitating language disorder for which behavioral speech therapy is the most efficient treatment, but therapy outcomes are variable and full recovery is not always achieved. It remains unclear if adjunctive brain stimulation (anodal transcranial direct current stimulation [A-tDCS]) applied during aphasia therapy can improve outcomes. Objective:To examine the futility of studying A-tDCS as an adjunctive intervention during speech therapy to improve speech production (naming) for individuals with long-term poststroke aphasia. Design, Setting, and Participants:Double-blinded, prospective randomized clinical trial using a futility design to test adjunctive A-tDCS during speech therapy. The setting was an outpatient clinic. Enrollment of individuals began in August 2012 and was completed in March 2017, and the duration of follow-up was 6 months. Analyses began in April 2017. The study recruited from a volunteer sample, and 89 patients were screened. Patients with long-term (>6 months) aphasia due to 1 previous left hemisphere stroke were enrolled. In comparing A-tDCS and sham tDCS, patients were matched based on site (University of South Carolina or Medical University of South Carolina), baseline age, type of aphasia, and aphasia severity. Interventions:Outpatient speech therapy for 3 weeks (15 sessions, 45 minutes each) combined with either A-tDCS vs sham tDCS applied to preserved left temporal lobe regions. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was the ability to name common objects, assessed twice before and after therapy. Results:A total of 74 patients were enrolled. Participants had a mean (SD) age of 60 (10) years, had 15 (2) years of education, and were 44 (40) months from stroke onset. There were 52 men (70%) and 62 non-Hispanic white individuals (84%). Most were retired or not employed (59 [80%]). Broca aphasia was the most common aphasia type (39 [52.7%]). The adjusted mean (SE) change from pretreatment baseline in correct naming was 13.9 (2.4) words (95% CI, 9.0-18.7) for A-tDCS and 8.2 (2.2) words (95% CI, 3.8-12.6) for sham tDCS, with mean (SE) A-tDCS difference of 5.7 (3.3) words (95% CI, -0.9 to 12.3), indicating a relative 70% increase in correct naming for A-tDCS relative to sham. The futility hypothesis P value was .90, indicating failure to reject the null hypothesis and, therefore, providing no evidence that further study of A-tDCS is futile. No serious adverse events were associated with A-tDCS. Conclusions and Relevance:Our findings provide motivation to proceed with another trial to study the effect of A-tDCS on the outcome of aphasia treatment in individuals poststroke. Anodal tDCS during speech therapy is feasible and potentially transformative for aphasia treatment and should be further studied. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01686373.

SUBMITTER: Fridriksson J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6583191 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMany patients do not fully regain motor function after ischemic stroke. Transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) targeting the motor cortex may improve motor outcome as an add-on intervention to physical rehabilitation. However, beneficial effects on motor function vary largely among patients within and across TDCS trials. In addition to a large heterogeneity of study designs, this variability may be caused by the fact that TDCS was given as a one-size-fits-all protocol without accounting for anatomical differences between subjects. The efficacy and consistency of TDCS might be improved by a patient-tailored design that ensures precise targeting of a physiologically relevant area with an appropriate current strength.MethodsIn a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled trial, patients with subacute ischemic stroke and residual upper-extremity paresis will receive two times 20 min of focal TDCS of ipsilesional primary motor hand area (M1-HAND) during supervised rehabilitation training three times weekly for 4 weeks. Anticipated 60 patients will be randomly assigned to active or sham TDCS of ipsilesional M1-HAND, using a central anode and four equidistant cathodes. The placement of the electrode grid on the scalp and current strength at each cathode will be personalized based on individual electrical field models to induce an electrical current of 0.2 V/m in the cortical target region resulting in current strengths between 1 and 4 mA. Primary endpoint will be the difference in change of Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) score between active TDCS and sham at the end of the intervention. Exploratory endpoints will include UE-FMA at 12 weeks. Effects of TDCS on motor network connectivity and interhemispheric inhibition will be assessed with functional MRI and transcranial magnetic stimulation.DiscussionThe study will show the feasibility and test the efficacy of personalized, multi-electrode anodal TDCS of M1-HAND in patients with subacute stroke patients with upper-extremity paresis. Concurrent multimodal brain mapping will shed light into the mechanisms of action of therapeutic personalized TDCS of M1-HAND. Together, the results from this trial may inform future personalized TDCS studies in patients with focal neurological deficits after stroke.

Project description:Background: Intensive speech-language therapy (SLT) can promote recovery from chronic post-stroke aphasia, a major consequence of stroke. However, effect sizes of intensive SLT are moderate, potentially reflecting a physiological limit of training-induced progress. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an easy-to-use, well-tolerated and low-cost approach that may enhance effectiveness of intensive SLT. In a recent phase-II randomized controlled trial, 26 individuals with chronic post-stroke aphasia received intensive SLT combined with anodal-tDCS of the left primary motor cortex (M1), resulting in improved naming and proxy-rated communication ability, with medium-to-large effect sizes. Aims: The proposed protocol seeks to establish the incremental benefit from anodal-tDCS of M1 in a phase-III randomized controlled trial with adequate power, ecologically valid outcomes, and evidence-based SLT. Methods: The planned study is a prospective randomized placebo-controlled (using sham-tDCS), parallel-group, double-blind, multi-center, phase-III superiority trial. A sample of 130 individuals with aphasia at least 6 months post-stroke will be recruited in more than 18 in- and outpatient rehabilitation centers. Outcomes: The primary outcome focuses on communication ability in chronic post-stroke aphasia, as revealed by changes on the Amsterdam-Nijmegen Everyday Language Test (A-scale; primary endpoint: 6-month follow-up; secondary endpoints: immediately after treatment, and 12-month follow-up). Secondary outcomes include measures assessing linguistic-executive skills, attention, memory, emotional well-being, quality of life, health economic costs, and adverse events (endpoints: 6-month follow-up, immediately after treatment, and 12-month follow-up). Discussion: Positive results will increase the quality of life for persons with aphasia and their families while reducing societal costs. After trial completion, a workshop with relevant stakeholders will ensure transfer into best-practice guidelines and successful integration within clinical routine. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03930121.

Project description:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been proposed as a potential intervention for subjective tinnitus, but supporting evidence remains limited. We aimed to investigate the effect of anodal high-definition tDCS of the left temporal area and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on tinnitus severity. This double-blind randomized controlled trial included 77 patients (age range 18-79, 43 male) with chronic subjective tinnitus as their primary complaint. Thirty-eight subjects received six consecutive sessions of dual-site sequential high-definition-tDCS with electrodes positioned over the left temporal area and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Both areas were stimulated for 15 min per session, with total stimulation time amounting to 30 min. Thirty-nine subjects received sham stimulation. The primary outcome measure was the change in tinnitus severity, as evaluated by the Tinnitus Functional Index, from baseline to a follow-up visit at 8 ± 2 weeks after treatment completion. Secondary outcomes included changes in perceived tinnitus loudness, as measured with a visual analogue scale and a tinnitus matching procedure, as well as scores on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Hyperacusis Questionnaire. No differences in Tinnitus Functional Index change scores were identified between the active treatment and sham control groups (linear regression: P = 0.86). The Tinnitus Functional Index scores decreased significantly over time in both groups (P = 0.0012), indicating the presence of a considerable placebo effect. These change scores were significantly influenced by sex (linear regression: P = 0.037) and baseline symptoms of anxiety (linear regression: P = 0.049) in both groups. In general, Tinnitus Functional Index scores decreased more profoundly in males and in subjects with a higher degree of anxiety at baseline. None of the included secondary measures differed significantly between experimental arms. Our results suggest that dual-site sequential high-definition-tDCS of the left temporal area and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex does not alleviate tinnitus severity. Interestingly, in our study population, fluctuations in tinnitus severity were influenced by gender and concurrent mental condition. It is therefore important to take these factors into account when conducting or planning randomized controlled trials in tinnitus populations.

Dataset Information

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation vs Sham Stimulation to Treat Aphasia After Stroke: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets