Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Short term effects of anodal cerebellar vs. anodal cerebral transcranial direct current stimulation in stroke patients, a randomized control trial
View through CrossRef
BackgroundBalance and gait impairments are major motor deficits in stroke patients that require intensive neuro-rehabilitation. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation is a neuro-modulatory technique recently used in stroke patients for balance and gait improvement. Majority of studies focusing on tDCS have assessed its effects on cerebral motor cortex and more recently cerebellum as well but to our best knowledge the comparison of stimulating these two regions in stroke patients is not investigated so far.ObjectiveThe current study aimed to compare the effect of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on cerebellar and cerebral motor cortex M1 in stroke patients.Materials and methodsThis double-blinded, parallel, randomized, sham controlled trial included 66 patients with a first-ever ischemic stroke were recruited into three groups; Cerebellar stimulation group (CbSG), M1 Stimulation Group (MSG), and Sham stimulation group (SSG). A total of three sessions of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation were given on consecutive days in addition to non-immersive virtual reality using Xbox 360 with kinect. Anodal tDCS with an intensity of 2 mA was applied for a duration of 20 min. Primary outcome measures berg balance scale (BBS), timed up and go test (TUG), BESTest Balance Evaluation–Systems Test (BESTest) and secondary outcomes measures montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), mini mental state examination (MMSE), Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JHFRAT), twenty five feet walk test (25FWT), six minute walk test (6MWT), and tDCS Adverse Effects was assessed before initiation of treatment (T0) and at the end of third session of stimulation (T1).ResultsThe results of between group’s analysis using mean difference showed a significant difference with p-value <0.05 for balance (BBS, TUG, BESTest), walking ability (6MWT, 25FWT), risk of fall (JHFRAT). Cognitive function did not show any significant change among the groups for MoCA with p-value >0.05 but MMSE was improved having significant p-value (p = 0.013). However, 6MWT and 25FWT showed non-significant results for both between group and within group analysis. In pairwise comparison both the cerebellar and cerebral stimulation groups showed Significant difference with p-value <0.05 in comparison to sham stimulation; BBS (cerebellar vs. sham p ≤ 0.001, cerebral vs. sham p = 0.011), TUG (cerebellar vs. sham p = 0.001, cerebral vs. sham p = 0.041), Bestest (cerebellar vs. sham p = 0.007, cerebral vs. sham p = 0.003). Whereas for JHFRAT only cerebellar stimulation in comparison to sham and motor cortex stimulation showed significant improvements (cerebellar vs. M1 p = 0.037, cerebellar vs. sham p = 0.037). MMSE showed significant improvement in M1 stimulation (M1 vs. cerebellar p = 0.036, M1 vs. sham p = 0.011).ConclusionFindings of the study suggest anodal tDCS stimulation of the cerebellum and cerebral motor cortex both improves gait, balance and risk of fall in stroke patients. However, both stimulation sites do not induce any notable improvement in cognitive function. Effects of both stimulation sites have similar effects on mobility in stroke patients.
Title: Short term effects of anodal cerebellar vs. anodal cerebral transcranial direct current stimulation in stroke patients, a randomized control trial
Description:
BackgroundBalance and gait impairments are major motor deficits in stroke patients that require intensive neuro-rehabilitation.
Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation is a neuro-modulatory technique recently used in stroke patients for balance and gait improvement.
Majority of studies focusing on tDCS have assessed its effects on cerebral motor cortex and more recently cerebellum as well but to our best knowledge the comparison of stimulating these two regions in stroke patients is not investigated so far.
ObjectiveThe current study aimed to compare the effect of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on cerebellar and cerebral motor cortex M1 in stroke patients.
Materials and methodsThis double-blinded, parallel, randomized, sham controlled trial included 66 patients with a first-ever ischemic stroke were recruited into three groups; Cerebellar stimulation group (CbSG), M1 Stimulation Group (MSG), and Sham stimulation group (SSG).
A total of three sessions of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation were given on consecutive days in addition to non-immersive virtual reality using Xbox 360 with kinect.
Anodal tDCS with an intensity of 2 mA was applied for a duration of 20 min.
Primary outcome measures berg balance scale (BBS), timed up and go test (TUG), BESTest Balance Evaluation–Systems Test (BESTest) and secondary outcomes measures montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), mini mental state examination (MMSE), Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JHFRAT), twenty five feet walk test (25FWT), six minute walk test (6MWT), and tDCS Adverse Effects was assessed before initiation of treatment (T0) and at the end of third session of stimulation (T1).
ResultsThe results of between group’s analysis using mean difference showed a significant difference with p-value <0.
05 for balance (BBS, TUG, BESTest), walking ability (6MWT, 25FWT), risk of fall (JHFRAT).
Cognitive function did not show any significant change among the groups for MoCA with p-value >0.
05 but MMSE was improved having significant p-value (p = 0.
013).
However, 6MWT and 25FWT showed non-significant results for both between group and within group analysis.
In pairwise comparison both the cerebellar and cerebral stimulation groups showed Significant difference with p-value <0.
05 in comparison to sham stimulation; BBS (cerebellar vs.
sham p ≤ 0.
001, cerebral vs.
sham p = 0.
011), TUG (cerebellar vs.
sham p = 0.
001, cerebral vs.
sham p = 0.
041), Bestest (cerebellar vs.
sham p = 0.
007, cerebral vs.
sham p = 0.
003).
Whereas for JHFRAT only cerebellar stimulation in comparison to sham and motor cortex stimulation showed significant improvements (cerebellar vs.
M1 p = 0.
037, cerebellar vs.
sham p = 0.
037).
MMSE showed significant improvement in M1 stimulation (M1 vs.
cerebellar p = 0.
036, M1 vs.
sham p = 0.
011).
ConclusionFindings of the study suggest anodal tDCS stimulation of the cerebellum and cerebral motor cortex both improves gait, balance and risk of fall in stroke patients.
However, both stimulation sites do not induce any notable improvement in cognitive function.
Effects of both stimulation sites have similar effects on mobility in stroke patients.
Related Results
Safety and Efficacy of Atezolizumab in Ovarian Cancer
Safety and Efficacy of Atezolizumab in Ovarian Cancer
Abstract
Introduction
Although the efficacy of PD-L1 blockade has been evaluated in analyses that combine pharmacologically distinct antibodies, the specific efficacy and safety of...
Long-term analgesic effect of trans-spinal direct current stimulation compared to non-invasive motor cortex stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome
Long-term analgesic effect of trans-spinal direct current stimulation compared to non-invasive motor cortex stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to compare the analgesic effect of motor cortex stimulation using high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulati...
Iranian stroke model-how to involve health policymakers
Iranian stroke model-how to involve health policymakers
Stroke in Iran, with more than 83 million population, is a leading cause of disability and mortality in adults. Stroke has higher incidence in Iran comparing the global situation a...
ASSESSMENT OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLINICAL MANIFESTATION OF CHIARI MALFORMATION TYPE I AND CEREBELLAR TONSILS HERNIATION MEASUREMENT WITHIN THE FORAMEN MAGNUM
ASSESSMENT OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CLINICAL MANIFESTATION OF CHIARI MALFORMATION TYPE I AND CEREBELLAR TONSILS HERNIATION MEASUREMENT WITHIN THE FORAMEN MAGNUM
ABSTRACT
Chiari malformation type I(CMI) is a common condition. It is a subject of controversy from diagnosis to the management (16). Classically the diagnosis is m...
Transcranial direct current stimulation for post-COVID fatigue: a randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study
Transcranial direct current stimulation for post-COVID fatigue: a randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study
Abstract
Fatigue is one of the most frequent and disabling symptoms of the post-COVID syndrome. In this study, we aimed to assess the effects of transcranial direct ...
HIPERTENSI, USIA, JENIS KELAMIN DAN KEJADIAN STROKE DI RUANG RAWAT INAP STROKE RSUD dr. M. YUNUS BENGKULU
HIPERTENSI, USIA, JENIS KELAMIN DAN KEJADIAN STROKE DI RUANG RAWAT INAP STROKE RSUD dr. M. YUNUS BENGKULU
Hypertension, Age, Sex, and Stroke Incidence In Stroke Installation Room RSUD dr. M. Yunus BengkuluABSTRAKStroke adalah gejala-gejala defisit fungsi susunan saraf yang diakibatka...
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Abstract
Introduction
Tarlatamab is a Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3) -directed bispecific T-cell engager recently approved for use in patients with advanced small cell lung cancer (SCL...
Hybrid diffuse optical neuromonitoring of cerebral haemodynamics: from the smallest premature born infants to adults
Hybrid diffuse optical neuromonitoring of cerebral haemodynamics: from the smallest premature born infants to adults
Hybrid diffuse optical devices allows for the non-invasive and continuous monitoring of the cerebral haemodynamics and metabolism. Such devices can be portable and are relatively i...

