Dataset Information

Systematic Review on the Safety and Tolerability of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Children and Adolescents.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a safe, tolerable, and acceptable technique in adults. However, there is limited evidence for its safety in youth. Although limited, there are a handful of important empirical articles that have evaluated safety and tolerability outcomes in youth. However, a synthesis of pediatric safety studies is not currently available.

Objective

To synthesize objective evidence regarding the safety and tolerability of pediatric tDCS based on the current state of the literature.

Methods

Our search and report used PRISMA guidelines. Our method systematically examined investigations purposefully designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and acceptability of tDCS in healthy and atypical youth that were submitted to three databases, from the beginning of the database to November 2019. Safety considerations were evaluated by studies utilizing neuroimaging, physiological changes, performance on tasks, and by analyzing reported and objective side effects; tolerability via rate of adverse events; and acceptability via rate of dropouts.

Results

We report on 203 sham sessions, 864 active sessions up to 2 mA, and 303 active hours of stimulation in 156 children. A total of 4.4% of the active sessions were in neurotypical controls, with the other 95.6% in clinical subjects.

Conclusion

In spite of the fact that the current evidence is sporadic and scarce, the presently reviewed literature provides support for the safety, tolerability, and acceptability, of tDCS in youth for 1-20 sessions of 20 min up to 2 mA. Future pediatric tDCS research is encouraged.

SUBMITTER: Buchanan DM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7916366 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic Review on the Safety and Tolerability of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Children and Adolescents.

Buchanan Derrick Matthew DM Bogdanowicz Thomas T Khanna Neha N Lockman-Dufour Guillaume G Robaey Philippe P D'Angiulli Amedeo A

Brain sciences 20210210 2

<h4>Background</h4>Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a safe, tolerable, and acceptable technique in adults. However, there is limited evidence for its safety in youth. Although limited, there are a handful of important empirical articles that have evaluated safety and tolerability outcomes in youth. However, a synthesis of pediatric safety studies is not currently available.<h4>Objective</h4>To synthesize objective evidence regarding the safety and tolerability of pediatric tDCS ...[more]

PMID: 33578648

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: Conventional transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and high-definition tDCS (HD-tDCS) may improve motor learning in children. Mechanisms are not understood. Neuronavigated robotic transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can produce individualised maps of primary motor cortex (M1) topography. We aimed to determine the effects of tDCS- and HD-tDCS-enhanced motor learning on motor maps. Methods: Typically developing children aged 12-18 years were randomised to right M1 anodal tDCS, HD-tDCS, or Sham during training of their left-hand on the Purdue Pegboard Task (PPT) over 5 days. Bilateral motor mapping was performed at baseline (pre), day 5 (post), and 6-weeks retention time (RT). Primary muscle was the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) with secondary muscles of abductor pollicis brevis (APB) and adductor digiti minimi (ADM). Primary mapping outcomes were volume (mm2/mV) and area (mm2). Secondary outcomes were centre of gravity (COG, mm) and hotspot magnitude (mV). Linear mixed-effects modelling was employed to investigate effects of time and stimulation type (tDCS, HD-tDCS, Sham) on motor map characteristics. Results: Twenty-four right-handed participants (median age 15.5 years, 52% female) completed the study with no serious adverse events or dropouts. Quality maps could not be obtained in two participants. No effect of time or group were observed on map area or volume. LFDI COG (mm) differed in the medial-lateral plane (x-axis) between tDCS and Sham (p = 0.038) from pre-to-post mapping sessions. Shifts in map COG were also observed for secondary left-hand muscles. Map metrics did not correlate with behavioural changes. Conclusion: Robotic TMS mapping can safely assess motor cortex neurophysiology in children undergoing motor learning and neuromodulation interventions. Large effects on map area and volume were not observed while changes in COG may occur. Larger controlled studies are required to understand the role of motor maps in interventional neuroplasticity in children.

Project description:BackgroundTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) have been described as promising alternatives to treat different pain syndromes. This study evaluated the effects of TMS and tDCS in the treatment of chronic orofacial pain, through a systematic review.MethodsAn electronic search was performed in major databases: MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, LILACS, BBO, Open Gray and CINAHL. The eligibility criteria comprised randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that applied TMS or tDCS to treat chronic orofacial pain. The variables analyzed were pain, functional limitation, quality of life, tolerance to treatment, somatosensory changes, and adverse effects. The risk of bias was assessed through the Cochrane Collaboration tool, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated through GRADE. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42018090774).ResultsThe electronic search resulted in 636 studies. Thereafter, the eligibility criteria were applied and the duplicates removed, resulting in eight RCTs (four TMS and four tDCS). The findings of these studies suggest that rTMS applied to the Motor cortex (M1), the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the secondary somatosensory cortex (S2) provide adequate orofacial pain relief. Two studies reported significant pain improvement with tDCS applied over M1 while the other two failed to demonstrate significant effects compared to placebo.ConclusionsrTMS, applied to M1, DLPFC or S2, is a promising approach for the treatment of chronic orofacial pain. Moreover, tDCS targeting M1 seems to be also effective in chronic orofacial pain treatment. The included studies used a wide variety of therapeutic protocols. In addition, most of them used small sample sizes, with a high risk of biases in their methodologies, thus producing a low quality of evidence. The results indicate that further research should be carried out with caution and with better-standardized therapeutic protocols.

Project description:Dysphagia is one of the most common symptoms in patients after stroke onset, which has multiple unfavorable effects on quality of life and functional recovery. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation that is widely used to improve deglutition function. Recently, some studies have confirmed that tDCS enhances deglutition function after stroke. However, the number of evaluation indexes used in those studies was small, and the number of trials included was limited. Most importantly, the optimal stimulation protocol is still uncertain and the safety of tDCS has not been reviewed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to address these shortcomings.MethodsSeven databases were searched entirely, including Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System (SinoMed), Wan-fang database, and the Chinese Scientific Journals Database (VIP) from inception to 31 December 2021. Two reviewers independently evaluated the eligibility of retrieved data according to the selection criteria and assessed the methodological quality of the studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Outcomes, measures, and indicators used in this study included the dysphagia outcome and severity scale (DOSS), modified Mann assessment of swallowing ability (MMASA), functional oral intake scale (FOIS), functional dysphagia scale (FDS), and Kubota's water-drinking test (KWDT). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate the intervention effect more specifically.ResultsFifteen trials with a total of 787 participants (394 subjects in the tDCS groups were treated with true tDCS, and 393 subjects in the control groups were wait-listed or treated with sham tDCS) involving tDCS for dysphagia after stroke and were included in the meta-analysis. Results of this meta-analysis confirmed that tDCS had a positive effect on post-stroke dysphagia. Subgroup analyses revealed that bilateral and high-intensity stimulation with tDCS had a more significant impact on post-stroke dysphagia. Furthermore, no adverse events occurred during the application of tDCS for post-stroke dysphagia.ConclusiontDCS can promote the recovery of deglutition function in patients with dysphagia after stroke. In addition, bilateral stimulation and high-intensity stimulation may have better effects. However, the safety evidence for tDCS and post-stroke dysphagia is insufficient.

Project description:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising method for altering cortical excitability with clinical implications. It has been increasingly used in neurodevelopmental disorders, especially attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but its efficacy (based on effect size calculations), safety, and stimulation parameters have not been systematically examined. In this systematic review, we aimed to (1) explore the effectiveness of tDCS on the clinical symptoms and neuropsychological deficits of ADHD patients, (2) evaluate the safety of tDCS application, especially in children with ADHD, (3) model the electrical field intensity in the target regions based on the commonly-applied and effective versus less-effective protocols, and (4) discuss and propose advanced tDCS parameters. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach, a literature search identified 14 empirical experiments investigating tDCS effects in ADHD. Partial improving effects of tDCS on cognitive deficits (response inhibition, working memory, attention, and cognitive flexibility) or clinical symptoms (e.g., impulsivity and inattention) are reported in 10 studies. No serious adverse effects are reported in 747 sessions of tDCS. The left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex are the regions most often targeted, and anodal tDCS the protocol most often applied. An intensity of 2 mA induced stronger electrical fields than 1 mA in adults with ADHD and was associated with significant behavioral changes. In ADHD children, however, the electrical field induced by 1 mA, which is likely larger than the electrical field induced by 1 mA in adults due to the smaller head size of children, was sufficient to result in significant behavioral change. Overall, tDCS seems to be a promising method for improving ADHD deficits. However, the clinical utility of tDCS in ADHD cannot yet be concluded and requires further systematic investigation in larger sample sizes. Cortical regions involved in ADHD pathophysiology, stimulation parameters (e.g. intensity, duration, polarity, and electrode size), and types of symptom/deficit are potential determinants of tDCS efficacy in ADHD. Developmental aspects of tDCS in childhood ADHD should be considered as well.

Dataset Information

Systematic Review on the Safety and Tolerability of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Children and Adolescents.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Systematic Review on the Safety and Tolerability of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Children and Adolescents.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets