Dataset Information

The Effect of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) on Attention and Memory Function in Stroke Rehabilitation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In recent years, the potential of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) for therapeutic effects on cognitive functions has been explored for populations with stroke. There are various NIBS methods depending on the stimulation site and stimulation parameters. However, there is no systematic NIBS review of post-stroke cognitive impairment with a focus on stimulation sites and stimulation parameters. The purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on effectiveness and safety of NIBS for cognitive impairment after a stroke to obtain new insights. This study was prospectively registered with the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews (CRD42020183298).

Methods

All English articles from MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL were searched from inception up to 31 December 2020. Randomized and prospective controlled trials were included for the analysis. Studies with at least five individuals post-stroke, whereby at least five sessions of NIBS were provided and using standardized neuropsychological measurement of cognition, were included. We assessed the methodological quality of selected studies as described in the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scoring system.

Results

A total of 10 studies met eligibility criteria. Six studies used repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and four studies used transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). The pooled sample size was 221 and 196 individuals who received rTMS and tDCS respectively. Eight studies combined general rehabilitation, cognitive training, or additional therapy with NIBS. In rTMS studies, target symptoms included global cognition (n = 4), attention (n = 3), memory (n = 4), working memory (WM) (n = 3), and executive function (n = 2). Five studies selected the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DPLFC) as the stimulation target. One rTMS study selected the right DLPFC as the inhibitory stimulation target. Four of six studies showed significant improvement. In tDCS studies, target symptoms included global cognition (n = 2), attention (n = 4), memory (n = 2) and WM (n = 2). Three studies selected the frontal area as the stimulation target. All studies showed significant improvement. In the meta-analysis, rTMS showed a significant effect on attention, memory, WM and global cognition classified by neuropsychological tests. On the other hand, tDCS had no significant effect.

Conclusions

In post-stroke patients with deficits in cognitive function, including attention, memory, and WM, NIBS shows promising positive effects. However, this effect is limited, suggesting that further studies are needed with more precision in stimulation sites and stimulation parameters. Future studies using advanced neurophysiological and neuroimaging tools to allow for a network-based approach to treat cognitive symptoms post-stroke with NIBS are warranted.

SUBMITTER: Hara T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7913379 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Effect of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) on Attention and Memory Function in Stroke Rehabilitation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Hara Takatoshi T Shanmugalingam Aturan A McIntyre Amanda A Burhan Amer M AM

Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) 20210203 2

<h4>Background</h4>In recent years, the potential of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) for therapeutic effects on cognitive functions has been explored for populations with stroke. There are various NIBS methods depending on the stimulation site and stimulation parameters. However, there is no systematic NIBS review of post-stroke cognitive impairment with a focus on stimulation sites and stimulation parameters. The purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on ...[more]

PMID: 33546266

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNon-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques and mirror therapy (MT) are promising rehabilitation measures for stroke. While the combination of MT and NIBS has been employed for post-stroke upper limb motor functional rehabilitation, its effectiveness has not been examined.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of combined MT and NIBS in the recovery of upper limb motor function in stroke patients.MethodsThe search was carried out in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Science Direct, CNKI, WANFANG and VIP until December 2021. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing MT or NIBS alone with the combination of NIBS and MT in improving upper extremity motor recovery after stroke were selected. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate the mean differences (MD) or the standard mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with random-effect models. Subgroup analyses were also conducted according to the types of control group, the types of NIBS, stimulation timing and phase poststroke.ResultsA total of 12 articles, including 17 studies with 628 patients, were reviewed in the meta-analysis. In comparison with MT or NIBS alone, the combined group significantly improved body structure and function (MD = 5.97; 95% CI: 5.01-6.93; P < 0.05), activity levels (SMD = 0.82; 95% CI 0.61-1.02; P < 0.05). For cortical excitability, the motor evoked potential cortical latency (SMD = -1.05; 95% CI:-1.57--0.52; P < 0.05) and the central motor conduction time (SMD=-1.31 95% CI:-2.02--0.61; P < 0.05) of the combined group were significantly shortened. A non-significant homogeneous summary effect size was found for MEP amplitude (SMD = 0.47; 95%CI = -0.29 to 1.23; P = 0.23). Subgroup analysis showed that there is an interaction between the stimulation sequence and the combined treatment effect.ConclusionIn this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, in comparison to the control groups, MT combined with NIBS promoted the recovery of upper extremity motor function after stroke, which was reflected in the analysis of body structure and function, activity levels, and cortical excitability.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022304455.

Project description:Many survivors of stroke report attentional impairments, such as diminished concentration and distractibility. However, the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation for improving these impairments is uncertain.This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2000 and previously updated in 2013. To determine whether people receiving cognitive rehabilitation for attention problems 1. show better outcomes in their attentional functions than those given no treatment or treatment as usual, and 2. have a better functional recovery, in terms of independence in activities of daily living, mood, and quality of life, than those given no treatment or treatment as usual. We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PsycBITE, REHABDATA and ongoing trials registers up to February 2019. We screened reference lists and tracked citations using Scopus. We included controlled clinical trials (CCTs) and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of cognitive rehabilitation for impairments of attention for people with stroke. We did not consider listening to music, meditation, yoga, or mindfulness to be a form of cognitive rehabilitation. We only considered trials that selected people with demonstrable or self-reported attentional deficits. The primary outcomes were measures of global attentional functions, and secondary outcomes were measures of attentional domains (i.e. alertness, selective attention, sustained attention, divided attention), functional abilities, mood, and quality of life. Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. We included no new trials in this update. The results are unchanged from the previous review and are based on the data of six RCTs with 223 participants. All six RCTs compared cognitive rehabilitation with a usual care control. Meta-analyses demonstrated no convincing effect of cognitive rehabilitation on subjective measures of attention either immediately after treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.03 to 1.08; P = 0.06; 2 studies, 53 participants; very low-quality evidence) or at follow-up (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.56; P = 0.41; 2 studies, 99 participants; very low-quality evidence). People receiving cognitive rehabilitation (when compared with control) showed that measures of divided attention recorded immediately after treatment may improve (SMD 0.67, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.98; P < 0.0001; 4 studies, 165 participants; low-quality evidence), but it is uncertain that these effects persisted (SMD 0.36, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.76; P = 0.08; 2 studies, 99 participants; very low-quality evidence). There was no evidence for immediate or persistent effects of cognitive rehabilitation on alertness, selective attention, and sustained attention. There was no convincing evidence for immediate or long-term effects of cognitive rehabilitation for attentional problems on functional abilities, mood, and quality of life after stroke. The effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation for attention deficits following stroke remains unconfirmed. The results suggest there may be an immediate effect after treatment on attentional abilities, but future studies need to assess what helps this effect persist and generalise to attentional skills in daily life. Trials also need to have higher methodological quality and better reporting.

Project description:Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can provide sensory feedback of ongoing brain oscillations, enabling stroke survivors to modulate their sensorimotor rhythms purposefully. A number of recent clinical studies indicate that repeated use of such BCIs might trigger neurological recovery and hence improvement in motor function. Here, we provide a first meta-analysis evaluating the clinical effectiveness of BCI-based post-stroke motor rehabilitation. Trials were identified using MEDLINE, CENTRAL, PEDro and by inspection of references in several review articles. We selected randomized controlled trials that used BCIs for post-stroke motor rehabilitation and provided motor impairment scores before and after the intervention. A random-effects inverse variance method was used to calculate the summary effect size. We initially identified 524 articles and, after removing duplicates, we screened titles and abstracts of 473 articles. We found 26 articles corresponding to BCI clinical trials, of these, there were nine studies that involved a total of 235 post-stroke survivors that fulfilled the inclusion criterion (randomized controlled trials that examined motor performance as an outcome measure) for the meta-analysis. Motor improvements, mostly quantified by the upper limb Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA-UE), exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID=5.25) in six BCI studies, while such improvement was reached only in three control groups. Overall, the BCI training was associated with a standardized mean difference of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.37 to 1.20) in FMA-UE compared to control conditions, which is in the range of medium to large summary effect size. In addition, several studies indicated BCI-induced functional and structural neuroplasticity at a subclinical level. This suggests that BCI technology could be an effective intervention for post-stroke upper limb rehabilitation. However, more studies with larger sample size are required to increase the reliability of these results.

Dataset Information

The Effect of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) on Attention and Memory Function in Stroke Rehabilitation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The Effect of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) on Attention and Memory Function in Stroke Rehabilitation Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets