Dataset Information

Safety and Feasibility of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation in Patients With Mild or Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Pilot Study.

ABSTRACT: Introduction:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a potentially novel strategy for cognitive enhancement in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of tDCS during cognitive training on cognitive functioning in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders. Methods:This study was primarily a single arm for safety, secondary a two-arm, parallel, randomized, and sham-controlled trial for potential efficacy. Patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders were recruited. The participants and raters were blinded to the group assignment. The participants in the active arm received tDCS (anodal; F3, cathodal, Fp2, 2A, 20 min) twice daily for five consecutive days, whereas those in the sham arm received the same amount of sham-tDCS. Calculation and reading tasks were conducted in both arms as a form of cognitive intervention for 20 min during tDCS. The primary outcome was the attrition rate during the trial in the active arm, which is expected to be less than 10%. The secondary outcomes were the between-group differences of adjusted means for several cognitive scales from baseline to post-intervention and follow-up. Results:Twenty patients [nine women (45%)], with a mean (standard deviation) age of 76.1 years participated; nine patients (45%) with minor neurocognitive disorders and 11 (55%) with major neurocognitive disorders were randomized, and 19 of them completed the trial. The attrition rate in the active arm was 0%, with no serious adverse events. Further, in the Intention-to-Treat analysis, patients in the active arm showed no statistically significant improvement compared with those who received the sham in the mean change scores of the mini-mental state examination [0.41; 95% CI (-1.85; 2.67) at day five, 1.08; 95% CI (-1.31; 3.46) at follow-up] and Alzheimer's disease assessment scale - cognition subscale [1.61; 95% CI (-4.2; 0.98) at day 5, 0.36; 95%CI (-3.19; 2.47) at follow-up]. Conclusion:These findings suggest that tDCS is safe and tolerable but causes no statistically significant cognitive effects in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders. Additional large-scale, well-designed clinical trials are warranted to evaluate the cognitive effects of tDCS as an augmentation to cognitive training. Clinical Trial Registration:www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03050385.

SUBMITTER: Inagawa T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6742726 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Safety and Feasibility of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation in Patients With Mild or Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Pilot Study.

Inagawa Takuma T Yokoi Yuma Y Narita Zui Z Maruo Kazushi K Okazaki Mitsutoshi M Nakagome Kazuyuki K

Frontiers in human neuroscience 20190906

<h4>Introduction</h4>Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a potentially novel strategy for cognitive enhancement in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of tDCS during cognitive training on cognitive functioning in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders.<h4>Methods</h4>This study was primarily a single arm for safety, secondary a two-arm, parallel, randomized, and sham-controlled trial for potential eff ...[more]

PMID: 31555109

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: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.

Dataset Information

Safety and Feasibility of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation in Patients With Mild or Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Pilot Study.

Publications

Safety and Feasibility of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation in Patients With Mild or Major Neurocognitive Disorders: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Pilot Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets