The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on upper-limb function post-stroke: A meta-analysis of multiple-session studies

Therapeutic effect of adjuvant therapy added to constraint-induced movement therapy in patients with subacute to chronic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This review investigated the effectiveness of adjuvant therapy combined with constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) in improving the paretic upper limb functionality in adults with stroke sequelae during the subacute to chronic rehabilitation phase.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT), electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and MEDLINE, were searched. We included RCTs that investigated the outcomes of adjuvant therapy (i.e. other therapies) added to CIMT compared with CIMT alone. Key trial findings were qualitatively synthesized and analyzed. This meta-analysis examined variables, such as mean scores and standard deviations, using the following outcome measures: Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) upper limb items, Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Amount of Use (AOU) of Motor Activity Log (MAL), and Quality of Movement (QOM) of MAL.

RESULTS

Eighteen eligible RCTs were included in the analysis. Adding CIMT to adjunctive therapy significantly improved FMA compared with CIMT alone (mean difference [MD] 4.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.60-5.44; I2 = 85%; 15 studies; 330 participants). Similarly, the ARAT and MAL-AOU scores improved significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

CIMT combined with several adjunctive therapies effectively improved upper limb function.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for upper extremity motor dysfunction in poststroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in poststroke patients with upper extremity motor dysfunction using a systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed for randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of both active and sham stimulation up until January 27, 2024.

REVIEW METHODS

Efficacy, including the upper extremity Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Action Research Arm Test, Barthel Index, and safety, were assessed. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies with 1555 participants were included. Transcranial direct current stimulation proved effective in improving upper extremity motor function (standardized mean difference = 0.22, 95% confidence interval: 0.12-0.32, P < 0.001) and Barthel Index (mean difference = 4.65, 95% confidence interval: 2.82-6.49, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed the highest transcranial direct current stimulation efficacy in patients with subacute stroke. Both anodal and cathodal stimulation were effective against upper extremity motor dysfunction. C3/C4 was the most effective stimulus target. Optimal stimulation parameters included stimulus current densities <0.057 mA/cm2 for 20-30 min and <30 sessions. Adverse effects and dropouts during follow-up showed that transcranial direct current stimulation is safe and feasible.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that both anodal and cathodal stimulation were significantly effective in subacute stroke patients, particularly when preceding other treatments and when C3/C4 is targeted.

The efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation on upper extremity motor function after stroke: A systematic review and comparative meta-analysis of different stimulation polarities

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been studied extensively. The cathodic (c-tDCS), anodic (a-tDCS), and bihemispheric stimulation have demonstrated efficacy in the management of the paretic upper extremity (UE) after stroke, but it has not been determined which stimulation polarity has, so far, shown the best results.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the available evidence to determine which tDCS polarity has the best results in improving UE motor function after stroke.

METHODS

PubMed, PEDro, Web of Science, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases were searched. Different Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms were combined for the search strategy, to cover all studies that performed a comparison between different tDCS configurations focused on UE motor rehabilitation in people with lived experience of stroke.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies remained for qualitative analysis and 12 for quantitative analysis. Non-significant differences with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were obtained for c-tDCS versus a-tDCS (g = 0.10, 95% CI = -0.13; 0.33, p = .39, N = 292), for a-tDCS versus bihemispheric (g = 0.02, 95% CI = -0.46; 0.42, p = .93, N = 81), and for c-tDCS versus bihemispheric (g = 0.09, 95% CI = -0.84; .66, p = .73, N = 100). No significant differences between the subgroups of the meta-analysis were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present meta-analysis showed no evidence that a stimulation polarity is superior to the others in the rehabilitation of UE motor function after stroke. A non-significant improvement trend was observed toward c-tDCS compared to a-tDCS.

Intensity-dependent effects of tDCS on motor learning are related to dopamine

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), are popular methods for inducing neuroplastic changes to alter cognition and behaviour. One challenge for the field is to optimise stimulation protocols to maximise benefits. For this to happen, we need a better understanding of how stimulation modulates cortical functioning/behaviour. To date, there is increasing evidence for a dose-response relationship between tDCS and brain excitability, however how this relates to behaviour is not well understood. Even less is known about the neurochemical mechanisms which may drive the dose-response relationship between stimulation intensities and behaviour. Here, we examine the effect of three different tDCS stimulation intensities (1 mA, 2 mA, 4 mA anodal motor cortex tDCS) administered during the explicit learning of motor sequences. Further, to assess the role of dopamine in the dose-response relationship between tDCS intensities and behaviour, we examined how pharmacologically increasing dopamine availability, via 100 mg of levodopa, modulated the effect of stimulation on learning. In the absence of levodopa, we found that 4 mA tDCS improved and 1 mA tDCS impaired acquisition of motor sequences relative to sham stimulation. Conversely, levodopa reversed the beneficial effect of 4 mA tDCS. This effect of levodopa was no longer evident at the 48-h follow-up, consistent with previous work characterising the persistence of neuroplastic changes in the motor cortex resulting from combining levodopa with tDCS. These results provide the first direct evidence for a role of dopamine in the intensity-dependent effects of tDCS on behaviour.

Motor Learning Following Stroke: Mechanisms of Learning and Techniques to Augment Neuroplasticity

Sensorimotor impairments are common after stroke requiring stroke survivors to relearn lost motor skills or acquire new ones in order to engage in daily activities. Thus, motor skill learning is a cornerstone of stroke rehabilitation. This article provides an overview of motor control and learning theories that inform stroke rehabilitation interventions, discusses principles of neuroplasticity, and provides a summary of practice conditions and techniques that can be used to augment motor learning and neuroplasticity in stroke rehabilitation.

Neurostimulation for treatment of post-stroke impairments

Neurostimulation, the use of electrical stimulation to modulate the activity of the nervous system, is now commonly used for the treatment of chronic pain, movement disorders and epilepsy. Many neurostimulation techniques have now shown promise for the treatment of physical impairments in people with stroke. In 2021, vagus nerve stimulation was approved by the FDA as an adjunct to intensive rehabilitation therapy for the treatment of chronic upper extremity deficits after ischaemic stroke. In 2024, pharyngeal electrical stimulation was conditionally approved by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence for neurogenic dysphagia in people with stroke who have a tracheostomy. Many other approaches have also been tested in pivotal device trials and a number of approaches are in early-phase study. Typically, neurostimulation techniques aim to increase neuroplasticity in response to training and rehabilitation, although the putative mechanisms of action differ and are not fully understood. Neurostimulation techniques offer a number of practical advantages for use after stroke, such as precise dosing and timing, but can be invasive and costly to implement. This Review focuses on neurostimulation techniques that are now in clinical use or that have reached the stage of pivotal trials and show considerable promise for the treatment of post-stroke impairments.

Exploring the Prospects of Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) as a Therapeutic Intervention for Post-Stroke Motor Recovery: A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Stroke survivors often have motor impairments and related functional deficits. Transcranial Electrical Stimulation (tES) is a rapidly evolving field that offers a wide range of capabilities for modulating brain function, and it is safe and inexpensive. It has the potential for widespread use for post-stroke motor recovery. Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS), Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS), and Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation (tRNS) are three recognized tES techniques that have gained substantial attention in recent years but have different mechanisms of action. tDCS has been widely used in stroke motor rehabilitation, while applications of tACS and tRNS are very limited. The tDCS protocols could vary significantly, and outcomes are heterogeneous.

PURPOSE

the current review attempted to explore the mechanisms underlying commonly employed tES techniques and evaluate their prospective advantages and challenges for their applications in motor recovery after stroke.

CONCLUSION

tDCS could depolarize and hyperpolarize the potentials of cortical motor neurons, while tACS and tRNS could target specific brain rhythms and entrain neural networks. Despite the extensive use of tDCS, the complexity of neural networks calls for more sophisticated modifications like tACS and tRNS.

Electric field simulation and appropriate electrode positioning for optimized transcranial direct current stimulation of stroke patients: an in Silico model

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) has benefits for motor rehabilitation in stroke patients, but its clinical application is limited due to inter-individual heterogeneous effects. Recently, optimized tDCS that considers individual brain structure has been proposed, but the utility thereof has not been studied in detail. We explored whether optimized tDCS provides unique electrode positions for each patient and creates a higher target electric field than the conventional approach. A comparative within-subject simulation study was conducted using data collected for a randomized controlled study evaluating the effect of optimized tDCS on upper extremity function in stroke patients. Using Neurophet tES LAB 3.0 software, individual brain models were created based on magnetic resonance images and tDCS simulations were performed for each of the conventional and optimized configurations. A comparison of electrode positions between conventional tDCS and optimized tDCS was quantified by calculation of Euclidean distances. A total of 21 stroke patients were studied. Optimized tDCS produced a higher electric field in the hand motor region than conventional tDCS, with an average improvement of 20% and a maximum of 52%. The electrode montage for optimized tDCS was unique to each patient and exhibited various configurations that differed from electrode placement of conventional tDCS. Optimized tDCS afforded a higher electric field in the target of a stroke patient compared to conventional tDCS, which was made possible by appropriately positioning the electrodes. Our findings may encourage further trials on optimized tDCS for motor rehabilitation after stroke.

Priming transcranial direct current stimulation for improving hemiparetic upper limb in patients with subacute stroke: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that modulates brain states by applying a weak electrical current to the brain cortex. Several studies have shown that anodal stimulation of the ipsilesional primary motor cortex (M1) may promote motor recovery of the affected upper limb in patients with stroke; however, a high-level clinical recommendation cannot be drawn in view of inconsistent findings. A priming brain stimulation protocol has been proposed to induce stable modulatory effects, in which an inhibitory stimulation is applied prior to excitatory stimulation to a brain area. Our recent work showed that priming theta burst magnetic stimulation demonstrated superior effects in improving upper limb motor function and neurophysiological outcomes. However, it remains unknown whether pairing a session of cathodal tDCS with a session of anodal tDCS will also capitalise on its therapeutic effects.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This will be a two-arm double-blind randomised controlled trial involving 134 patients 1-6 months after stroke onset. Eligible participants will be randomly allocated to receive 10 sessions of priming tDCS+robotic training, or 10 sessions of non-priming tDCS+robotic training for 2 weeks. The primary outcome is the Fugl-Meyer Assessment-upper extremity, and the secondary outcomes are the Wolf Motor Function Test and Modified Barthel Index. The motor-evoked potentials, regional oxyhaemoglobin level and resting-state functional connectivity between the bilateral M1 will be acquired and analysed to investigate the effects of priming tDCS on neuroplasticity.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Shanghai Yangzhi Rehabilitation Center (reference number: Yangzhi2023-022) and will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1964, as revised in 2013.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2300074681.

Effects of anodal tDCS on resting state eeg power and motor function in acute stroke: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a beneficial adjunctive tool in stroke rehabilitation. However, only a few studies have investigated its effects on acute stroke and recruited only individuals with mild motor deficits. This study investigated the effect of five consecutive sessions of anodal tDCS and conventional physical therapy on brain activity and motor outcomes in individuals with acute stroke, with low and high motor impairments.

METHODS

Thirty participants were recruited and randomly allocated to either the anodal or sham tDCS group. Five consecutive sessions of tDCS (1.5 mA anodal or sham tDCS for 20 min) were administered, followed by conventional physical therapy. Electroencephalography (EEG), Fugl-Meyer Motor Assessment (FMA), and Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) were performed at pre-, post-intervention (day 5), and 1-month follow-up. Sub-analyses were performed on participants with low and high motor impairments. The relationship between EEG power and changes in motor functions was assessed.

RESULTS

Linear regression showed a significant positive correlation between beta bands and the FMA score in the anodal group. Elevated high frequency bands (alpha and beta) were observed at post-intervention and follow-up in all areas of both hemispheres in the anodal group, while only in the posterior area of the non-lesioned hemisphere in the sham group; however, such elevation induced by tDCS was not greater than sham. Lower limb function assessed by FMA was improved in the anodal group compared with the sham group at post-intervention and follow-up only in those with low motor impairment. For the upper limb outcomes, no difference between groups was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Five consecutive days of anodal tDCS and physical therapy in acute stroke did not result in a superior improvement of beta bands that commonly related to stroke recovery over sham, but improved lower extremity functions with a post-effect at 1-month follow-up in low motor impairment participants. The increase of beta bands in the lesioned brain in the anodal group was associated with improvement in lower limb function.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04578080, date of first registration 10/01/2020.

Effect of optimized transcranial direct current stimulation on motor cortex activation in patients with sub-acute or chronic stroke: a study protocol for a single-blinded cross-over randomized control trial

Introduction

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown positive but inconsistent results in stroke rehabilitation. This could be attributed to inter-individual variations in brain characteristics and stroke lesions, which limit the use of a single tDCS protocol for all post-stroke patients. Optimizing the electrode location in tDCS for each individual using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to generate three-dimensional computer models and calculate the electric field (E-field) induced by tDCS at a specific target point in the primary motor cortex may help reduce these inconsistencies. In stroke rehabilitation, locating the optimal position that generates a high E-field in a target area can influence motor recovery. Therefore, this study was designed to determine the effect of personalized tDCS electrode positions on hand-knob activation in post-stroke patients.

Method

This is a crossover study with a sample size of 50 participants, who will be randomly assigned to one of six groups and will receive one session of either optimized-active, conventional-active, or sham tDCS, with 24 h between sessions. The tDCS parameters will be 1 mA (5 × 5 cm electrodes) for 20 min. The motor-evoked potential (MEP) will be recorded before and after each session over the target area (motor cortex hand-knob) and the MEP hotspot. The MEP amplitude at the target location will be the primary outcome.

Discussion

We hypothesize that the optimized-active tDCS session would show a greater increase in MEP amplitude over the target area in patients with subacute and chronic stroke than conventional and sham tDCS sessions.Clinical trial registration: https://cris.nih.go.kr, identifier KCT0007536.

Cortical activity associated with focal muscle vibration applied directly to the affected forearm flexor muscle in post-stroke patients: an fNIRS study

Objective

The purpose of this study was to utilize functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to identify changes in cortical activity caused by focal muscle vibration (FMV), which was directly administered to the affected forearm flexor muscles of hemiplegic stroke patients. Additionally, the study aimed to investigate the correlation between these changes and the clinical characteristics of the patients, thereby expanding the understanding of potential neurophysiological mechanisms linked to these effects.

Methods

Twenty-two stroke patients with right hemiplegia who were admitted to our ward for rehabilitation were selected for this study. The fNIRS data were collected from subjects using a block-design paradigm. Subsequently, the collected data were analyzed using the NirSpark software to determine the mean Oxyhemoglobin (Hbo) concentrations for each cortical region of interest (ROI) in the task and rest states for every subject. The stimulation task was FMV (frequency 60 Hz, amplitude 6 mm) directly applied to belly of the flexor carpi radialis muscle (FCR) on the affected side. Hbo was measured in six regions of interest (ROIs) in the cerebral cortex, which included the bilateral prefrontal cortex (PFC), sensorimotor cortex (SMC), and occipital cortex (OC). The clinical characteristics of the patients were assessed concurrently, including Lovett's 6-level muscle strength assessment, clinical muscle tone assessment, the upper extremity function items of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA-UE), Bruunstrom staging scale (BRS), and Modified Barthel index (MBI). Statistical analyses were conducted to determine the activation in the ROIs and to comprehend its correlation with the clinical characteristics of the patients.

Results

Statistical analysis revealed that, except for right OC, there were statistically significant differences between the mean Hbo in the task state and rest state for bilateral SMC, PFC, and left OC. A positive correlation was observed between the muscle strength of the affected wrist flexor group and the change values of Hbo (Hbo-CV), as well as the beta values in the left SMC, PFC, and OC. However, no statistical correlation was found between muscle strength and Hbo-CV or beta values in the right SMC, PFC, and OC. The BRS of the affected upper limb exhibited a positive correlation with the Hbo-CV or beta values in the left SMC and PFC. In contrast, no statistical correlation was observed in the right SMC, PFC, and bilateral OC. No significant correlation was found between the muscle tone of the affected wrist flexor group, FMA-UE, MBI, and Hbo-CV or beta values of cortical ROIs.

Conclusion

FMV-evoked sensory stimulation applied directly to the FCR belly on the paralyzed side activated additional brain cortices, including bilateral PFC and ipsilesional OC, along with bilateral SMC in stroke patients. However, the clinical characteristics of the patients were only correlated with the intensity of ipsilesional SMC and PFC activation. The results of this study provide neurophysiological theoretical support for the expanded clinical application of FMV.

Supporting Post-Stroke Language and Cognition with Pharmacotherapy: Tools for Each Phase of Care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is enormous enthusiasm for the possibility of pharmacotherapies to treat language deficits that can arise after stroke. Speech language therapy remains the most frequently utilized and most strongly evidenced treatment, but the numerous barriers to patients receiving the therapy necessary to recover have motivated the creation of a relatively modest, yet highly cited, body of evidence to support the use of pharmacotherapy to treat post-stroke aphasia directly or to augment traditional post-stroke aphasia treatment. In this review, we survey the use of pharmacotherapy to preserve and support language and cognition in the context of stroke across phases of care, discuss key ongoing clinical trials, and identify targets that may become emerging interventions in the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent trials have shifted focus from short periods of drug therapy supporting therapy in the chronic phase to longer terms approaching pharmacological maintenance beginning more acutely. Recent innovations in hyperacute stroke care, such as tenecteplase, and acute initiation of neuroprotective agents and serotonin reuptake inhibitors are important areas of ongoing research that complement the ongoing search for effective adjuvants to later therapy. Currently there are no drugs approved in the United States for the treatment of aphasia. Nevertheless, pharmacological intervention may provide a benefit to all phases of stroke care.

Comparison of bihemispheric and unihemispheric M1 transcranial direct current stimulations during physical therapy in subacute stroke patients: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite the central origin of stroke affecting the primary motor cortex M1, most physical and occupational rehabilitation programs focus on peripheral treatments rather than addressing the central origin of the problem. This highlights the urgent need for effective protocols to improve neurological rehabilitation and achieve better long-term functional outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

Our hypothesis was that the bihemispheric delivery of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is superior to unihemispheric in enhancing motor function after stroke, in both the upper and lower extremities.

METHODS

35 sub-acute ischemic stroke survivors were randomly divided into three groups: bihemispheric and unihemispheric treatment groups, or sham groups. Each participant received a 20-minute session of tDCS with an intensity of 2 mA during physical therapy sessions, three days a week, for four weeks. The outcomes were measured using Fugl-Meyer assessment scale, modified Ashworth scale, Berg balance scale, and serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) levels.

RESULTS

One-way ANOVA test indicated a significant effect of both treatment protocols on the upper extremity (p = < 0.001) and lower extremity (p = .034) for motor measures, but there was no difference between the two (p = .939). Kruskal Wallis test for spasticity showed a significant improvement in both treatment groups for elbow (p = .036) and wrist flexors (p = .025), compared to the sham group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in spasticity between uni- and bihemispheric stimulation for elbow (p = .731) or wrist flexors (p = .910).

CONCLUSION

There is no statistically significant difference in efficacy between bihemispheric and unihemispheric tDCS in patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke. .

Effects of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation on rehabilitation of upper limb motor function after stroke

Background

The cerebellum is involved in the control and coordination of movements but it remains unclear whether stimulation of the cerebellum could improve the recovery of upper limb motor function. Therefore, this study aimed to explore whether cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) therapy could promote the recovery of upper limb motor function in patients who suffered a stroke.

Methods

In this randomized, double-blind, and sham-controlled prospective study, 77 stroke patients were recruited and randomly assigned to the tDCS group (n = 39) or the control group (n = 38). The patients received anodal (2 mA, 20 min) or sham tDCS therapy for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was the change in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) score from baseline to the first day after 4 weeks of treatment (T1) and 60 days after 4 weeks of treatment (T2). The secondary outcomes were the FMA-UE response rates assessed at T1 and T2. Adverse events (AEs) related to the tDCS treatment were also recorded.

Results

At T1, the mean FMA-UE score increased by 10.7 points [standard error of the mean (SEM) = 1.4] in the tDCS group and by 5.8 points (SEM = 1.3) in the control group (difference between the two groups was 4.9 points, P = 0.013). At T2, the mean FMA-UE score increased by 18.9 points (SEM = 2.1) in the tDCS group and by 12.7 points (SEM = 2.1) in the control group (the difference between the two groups was 6.2 points, P = 0.043). At T1, 26 (70.3%) patients in the tDCS group had a clinically meaningful response to the FMA-UE score compared to 12 (34.3%) patients in the control group (the difference between the two groups was 36.0%, P =0.002). At T2, 33 (89.2%) patients in the tDCS group had a clinically meaningful response to the FMA-UE score compared with 19 (54.3%) patients in the control group (the difference between the two groups was 34.9%, P = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. In the subgroup analysis of different hemiplegic sides, the rehabilitation effect of patients with right hemiplegia was better than that of patients with left hemiplegia (P &lt; 0.05); in the age subgroup analysis, different age groups of patients did not show a significant difference in the rehabilitation effect (P &gt; 0.05).

Conclusion

Cerebellar tDCS can be used as an effective and safe treatment to promote recovery of upper limb motor function in stroke patients.

Trial registration

ChiCTR.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2200061838.

Effects of bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients: a double-blind, randomized sham-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) can simultaneously modulate bilateral corticospinal excitability and interhemispheric interaction. However, how tDCS affects subacute stroke recovery remains unclear. We investigated the effects of bihemispheric tDCS on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients.

METHODS

We enrolled subacute inpatients who had first-ever ischemic stroke at subcortical regions and moderate-to-severe baseline Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) score 2-56. Participants between 14 and 28 days after stroke were double-blind, randomly assigned (1:1) to receive real (n = 13) or sham (n = 14) bihemispheric tDCS (with ipsilesional M1 anode and contralesional M1 cathode, 20 min, 2 mA) during task practice twice daily for 20 sessions in two weeks. Residual integrity of the ipsilesional corticospinal tract was stratified between groups. The primary efficacy outcome was the change in FMA-UE score from baseline (responder as an increase ≥ 10). The secondary measures included changes in the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), FMA-Lower Extremity (FMA-LE) and explorative resting-state MRI functional connectivity (FC) of target regions after intervention and three months post-stroke.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven participants completed the study without significant adverse effects. Nineteen patients (70%) had no recordable baseline motor-evoked potentials (MEP-negative) from the paretic forearm. Compared with the sham group, the real tDCS group showed enhanced improvement of FMA-UE after intervention (p < 0.01, effect size η² = 0.211; responder rate: 77% vs. 36%, p = 0.031), which sustained three months post-stroke (p < 0.01), but not ARAT. Interestingly, in the MEP-negative subgroup analysis, the FMA-UE improvement remained but delayed. Additionally, the FMA-LE improvement after real tDCS was not significantly greater until three months post-stroke (p < 0.01). We found that the individual FMA-UE improvements after real tDCS were associated with bilateral intrahemispheric, rather than interhemispheric, FC strengths in the targeted cortices, while the improvements after sham tDCS were associated with predominantly ipsilesional FC changes after adjustment for age and sex (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Bihemispheric tDCS during task-oriented training may facilitate motor recovery in subacute stroke patients, even with compromised corticospinal tract integrity. Further studies are warranted for tDCS efficacy and network-specific neuromodulation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: (ID: NCT02731508).

Fine-grained brain tissue segmentation for brain modeling of stroke patient

Brain segmentation of stroke patients can facilitate brain modeling for electrical non-invasive brain stimulation, a therapy for stimulating brain function using an electric current. However, it remains challenging owing to its time-consuming, labor-dependent, and complicated pipeline. In addition, conventional tools that define lesions into one region rather than distinguishing between the stroke-affected regions and cerebrospinal fluid can lead to inaccurate treatment results. In this study, we first define a novel stroke-affected region as a detailed sub-region of the conventionally defined lesion. Subsequently, a novel comprehensive framework is proposed to segment head-brain and fine-level stroke-affected regions for normal controls and chronic stroke patients. The proposed framework consists of a time-efficient and precise deep learning-based segmentation model. The experiment results indicate that the proposed method perform better than the conventional deep learning-based segmentation model in terms of the evaluation metrics. The proposed method would be a valuable addition to brain modeling for non-invasive neuromodulation.

Do Higher Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Doses Lead to Greater Gains in Upper Limb Motor Function in Post-Stroke Patients?

Objective: To investigate whether a higher number of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) sessions results in a greater improvement in upper limb function in chronic post-stroke patients. Materials and methods: A randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind clinical trial was conducted in 57 chronic post-stroke patients (≥ 3 months after their injuries). The patients were allocated to receive sessions of tDCS combined with physiotherapy and divided into three groups (anodal, cathodal, and sham). The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) was used to assess the sensorimotor impairment of the patients’ upper limbs before (baseline) and after five and ten sessions. The percentage of patients who achieved a clinically significant improvement (> five points on the FMA-UE) was also analyzed. Results: The FMA-UE score increased after five and ten sessions in both the anodal and cathodal tDCS groups, respectively, compared to the baseline. However, in the sham group, the FMA-UE score increased only after ten sessions. When compared to the sham group, the mean difference from the baseline after five sessions was higher in the anodal tDCS group. The percentage of individuals who achieved greater clinical improvement was higher in the stimulation groups than in the sham group and after ten sessions when compared to five sessions. Conclusions: Our results suggest that five tDCS sessions are sufficient to augment the effect of standard physiotherapy on upper limb function recovery in chronic post-stroke patients, and ten sessions resulted in greater gains.

Multimodal physical training combined with tDCS improves physical fitness components in people after stroke: a double-blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) seems to be a potential tool to optimize the long-term effects of multimodal physical training (MPT) on fitness components in post-stroke patients.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the effects of cortical tDCS combined with MPT on motor function reflected by strength, motor performance, and cardiorespiratory capacity in chronic stroke patients.

METHODS

This double-blind randomized controlled trial included 18 volunteers (55 ± 10 y, 72 ± 13 kg), who underwent MPT preceded by either sham stimulation (SHAM) or 2 mA bi-hemispheric tDCS. MPT consisted of 24 sessions of 60-70 min performed 2 d/wk within 12-16 weeks, with individualized intensity. Outcomes were Fugl-Meyer scores for lower limbs (FM-LL), and total (FM-Total); speed in the 10-m walk test (10MWT); oxygen uptake and work output at maximal effort (VO_2max and W_max), and gas exchange threshold (VO₂-GET and W-GET); peak torque of isokinetic knee extension (PT-EXT) and flexion (PT-FLEX) of paretic and non-paretic limbs; bilateral strength deficit during knee extension (DS-EXT) and flexion (DS-FLEX).

RESULTS

Pre- vs. post-intervention improvements were detected in tDCS vs. SHAM (p < 0.05) for FM-total (29.6% vs. 15.9%; effect size [ES] = 0.78), FM-LL (35.9% vs. 9.0%; ES = 1.23), 10MWT (10.6% vs. 3.8%; ES = 0.67), W_max (75.0% vs. 4.3%; ES = 1.68), W-GET (91.6% vs. 12.4%; ES = 1.62), PT-EXT (25.6% vs. -6.5%; ES = 1.94) and PT-FLEX (26.3% vs. 9.8%; ES = 0.65) of the paretic limb, and DS-EXT (-13.7% vs. 2.5; ES = 1.43).

CONCLUSION

Bi-hemispheric cortical tDCS optimized the effects of MPT performed with moderate volume and intensity upon muscle strength, motor function, and cardiorespiratory performance in stroke hemiparetic survivors. (Registration number RBR-22rh3p).

The influence of a single transcranial direct current stimulation session on physical fitness in healthy subjects: a systematic review

Physical fitness is of indisputable importance for both health, and sports. Currently, the brain is being increasingly recognized as a contributor to physical fitness. Hereby, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), as an ergogenic aid, has gained scientific interest. The current PRISMA-adherent review aimed to examine the effect of tDCS on the three core components of physical fitness: muscle strength, -endurance and cardiopulmonary endurance. Randomized controlled- or cross-over trials evaluating the effect of a single tDCS session (vs. sham) in healthy individuals were included. Hereby, a wide array of tDCS-related factors (e.g., tDCS montage and dose) was taken into account. Thirty-five studies (540 participants) were included. Between-study heterogeneity in factors such as age, activity level, tDCS protocol, and outcome measures was large. The capacity of tDCS to improve physical fitness varied substantially across studies. Nevertheless, muscle endurance was most susceptible to improvements following anodal tDCS (AtDCS), with 69% of studies (n = 11) investigating this core component of physical fitness reporting positive effects. The primary motor cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex were targeted the most, with positive results being reported on muscle and cardiopulmonary endurance. Finally, online tDCS seemed most beneficial, and no clear relationship between tDCS and dose-related parameters seemed present. These findings can contribute to optimizing tDCS interventions during the rehabilitation of patients with a variety of (chronic) diseases such as cardiovascular disease. Therefore, future studies should focus on further unraveling the potential of AtDCS on physical fitness and, more specifically, muscle endurance in both healthy subjects and patients suffering from (chronic) diseases. This study was registered in Prospero with the registration number CRD42021258529. "To enable PROSPERO to focus on COVID-19 registrations during the 2020 pandemic, this registration record was automatically published exactly as submitted. The PROSPERO team has not checked eligibility".

Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Augmented with Motor Imagery and Upper-Limb Functional Training for Upper-Limb Stroke Rehabilitation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Combining transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with other therapies is reported to produce promising results in patients with stroke. The purpose of the study was to determine the effect of combining tDCS with motor imagery (MI) and upper-limb functional training for upper-limb rehabilitation among patients with chronic stroke.

METHODS

A single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted among 64 patients with chronic stroke. The control group received sham tDCS with MI, while the experimental group received real tDCS with MI. Both groups performed five different upper-limb functional training exercises coupled with tDCS for 30 min, five times per week for two weeks. Fugl-Meyer's scale (FMA) and the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) were used to measure the outcome measures at baseline and after the completion of the 10th session.

RESULTS

Analysis of covariance showed significant improvements in the post-test mean scores for FMA (F (414.4) = 35.79, p < 0.001; η² = 0.37) and ARAT (F (440.09) = 37.46, p < 0.001; η² = 0.38) in the experimental group compared to the control group while controlling for baseline scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Anodal tDCS stimulation over the affected primary motor cortex coupled with MI and upper-limb functional training reduces impairment and disability of the upper limbs among patients with chronic stroke.

Reversing the Ruin: Rehabilitation, Recovery, and Restoration After Stroke

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Stroke is a common cause of disability in aging adults. A given individual's needs after stroke vary as a function of the stroke extent and location. The purpose of this review was to discuss recent clinical investigations addressing rehabilitation of an array of overlapping functional domains.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research is ongoing in the domains of movement, cognition, attention, speech, language, swallowing, and mental health. To best assist patients' recovery, innovative research has sought to develop and evaluate behavioral approaches, identify and refine synergistic approaches that augment the response to behavioral therapy, and integrate technology where appropriate, particularly to introduce and titrate real-world complexity and improve the overall experience of therapy. Recent and ongoing trials have increasingly adopted a multidisciplinary nature - augmenting refined behavioral therapy approaches with methods for increasing their potency, such as pharmaceutical or electrical interventions. The integration of virtual reality, robotics, and other technological advancements has generated immense excitement, but has not resulted in consistent improvements over more universally accessible, lower technology therapy.

Addressing transcranial electrical stimulation variability through prospective individualized dosing of electric field strength in 300 participants across two samples: the 2-SPED approach

Objective. Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) is a promising method for modulating brain activity and excitability with variable results to date. To minimize electric (E-)field strength variability, we introduce the 2-sample prospective E-field dosing (2-SPED) approach, which uses E-field strengths induced by tES in a first population to individualize stimulation intensity in a second population.Approach. We performed E-field modeling of three common tES montages in 300 healthy younger adults. First, permutation analyses identified the sample size required to obtain a stable group average E-field in the primary motor cortex (M1), with stability being defined as the number of participants where all group-average E-field strengths ± standard deviation did not leave the population's 5-95 percentile range. Second, this stable group average was used to individualize tES intensity in a second independent population (n = 100). The impact of individualized versus fixed intensity tES on E-field strength variability was analyzed.Main results. In the first population, stable group average E-field strengths (V/m) in M1 were achieved at 74-85 participants, depending on the tES montage. Individualizing the stimulation intensity (mA) in the second population resulted in uniform M1 E-field strength (all p < 0.001) and significantly diminished peak cortical E-field strength variability (all p < 0.01), across all montages.Significance. 2-SPED is a feasible way to prospectively induce more uniform E-field strengths in a region of interest. Future studies might apply 2-SPED to investigate whether decreased E-field strength variability also results in decreased physiological and behavioral variability in response to tES.

Transcranial-Direct-Current-Stimulation Accelerates Motor Recovery After Cortical Infarction in Mice: The Interplay of Structural Cellular Responses and Functional Recovery

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) promotes recovery after stroke in humans. The underlying mechanisms, however, remain to be elucidated. Animal models suggest tDCS effects on neuroinflammation, stem cell proliferation, neurogenesis, and neural plasticity.

OBJECTIVE

In a longitudinal study, we employed tDCS in the subacute and chronic phase after experimental focal cerebral ischemia in mice to explore the relationship between functional recovery and cellular processes.

METHODS

Mice received photothrombosis in the right motor cortex, verified by Magnetic Resonance Imaging. A composite neuroscore quantified subsequent functional deficits. Mice received tDCS daily: either 5 sessions from day 5 to 9, or 10 sessions with days 12 to 16 in addition. TDCS with anodal or cathodal polarity was compared to sham stimulation. Further imaging to assess proliferation and neuroinflammation was performed by immunohistochemistry at different time points and Positron Emission Tomography at the end of the observation time of 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Cathodal tDCS at 198 kC/m² (220 A/m²) between days 5 and 9 accelerated functional recovery, increased neurogenesis, decreased microglial activation, and mitigated CD16/32-expression associated with M1-phenotype. Anodal tDCS exerted similar effects on neurogenesis and microglial polarization but not on recovery of function or microglial activation. TDCS on days 12 to 16 after stroke did not induce any further effects, suggesting that the therapeutic time window was closed by then.

CONCLUSION

Overall, data suggest that non-invasive neuromodulation by tDCS impacts neurogenesis and microglial activation as critical cellular processes influencing functional recovery during the early phase of regeneration from focal cerebral ischemia.

High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current with Electrical Theta Burst on Post-Stroke Motor Rehabilitation: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

High-definition transcranial electrical theta burst superimposing direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS-eTBS) not only incorporates the therapeutic advantages of tDCS and TBS but enhances stimulation focality and practicality. However, the applicability of this innovative neuromodulatory device in post-stroke rehabilitation remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the HD-tDCS-eTBS on upper extremity (UE) motor function in patients with chronic stroke.

METHODS

A patient-blinded, randomized controlled study was conducted. Twenty-four participants were randomly assigned into either the active HD-tDCS-eTBS group or sham HD-tDCS-eTBS group. Both groups received 20 minutes of active/sham HD-tDCS-eTBS combined with 30 minutes of conventional UE rehabilitation each time, 3 times a week for 4 weeks. Outcome measures including the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity, Wolf Motor Function Test, Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test, Finger-Nose Test, and Modified Ashworth Scale were assessed before and immediately after the intervention period.

RESULTS

Spasticity of shoulder adductor (P = .05), elbow extensor (P = .04), and thumb flexor (P < .01) were significantly reduced in the active HD-tDCS-eTBS group versus the sham group. Nonsignificant trends in the improvements of most other outcome measures were in favor of the active HD-tDCS-eTBS group with moderate to large effect sizes (P = .06-.26, η_p² = 0.06-0.16). No severe adverse events except for slight skin redness under the stimulus electrode was detected after the HD-tDCS-eTBS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support that HD-tDCS-eTBS is safe and has therapeutic potential for post-stroke UE motor rehabilitation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04278105).

Effect of a tailored upper extremity strength training intervention combined with direct current stimulation in chronic stroke survivors: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Strengthening exercises are recommended for managing persisting upper limb (UL) weakness following a stroke. Yet, strengthening exercises often lead to variable gains because of their generic nature. For this randomized controlled trial (RCT), we aimed to determine whether tailoring strengthening exercises using a biomarker of corticospinal integrity, as reflected in the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), could optimize training effects in the affected UL. A secondary aim was to determine whether applying anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could enhance exercise-induced training effects. For this multisite RCT, 90 adults at the chronic stage after stroke (>6 months) were recruited. Before training, participants underwent TMS to detect the presence of MEPs in the affected hand. The MEP amplitude was used to stratify participants into three training groups: (1) low-intensity, MEP <50 μV, (2) moderate-intensity, 50 μV < MEP < 120 μV, and (3) high-intensity, MEP>120 μV. Each group trained at a specific intensity based on the one-repetition maximum (1 RM): low-intensity, 35–50% 1RM; moderate-intensity, 50–65% 1RM; high-intensity, 70–85% 1RM. The strength training targeted the affected UL and was delivered 3X/week for four consecutive weeks. In each training group, participants were randomly assigned to receive either real or sham anodal tDCS (2 mA, 20 min) over the primary motor area of the affected hemisphere. Pre-/post-intervention, participants underwent a clinical evaluation of their UL to evaluate motor impairments (Fugl-Meyer Assessment), manual dexterity (Box and Blocks test) and grip strength. Post-intervention, all groups exhibited similar gains in terms of reduced impairments, improved dexterity, and grip strength, which was confirmed by multivariate and univariate analyses. However, no effect of interaction was found for tDCS or training group, indicating that tDCS had no significant impact on outcomes post-intervention. Collectively, these results indicate that adjusting training intensity based on the size of MEPs in the affected extremity provides a useful approach to optimize responses to strengthening exercises in chronic stroke survivors. Also, the lack of add-on effects of tDCS applied to the lesioned hemisphere on exercise-induced improvements in the affected UL raises questions about the relevance of combining such interventions in stroke.

Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper-limb and finger function in stroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a promising intervention for stroke rehabilitation. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of rTMS in restoring motor function. This meta-analysis aimed to summarize the current evidence of the effect of rTMS in improving upper limb function and fine motor recovery in stroke patients.

Methods

Three online databases (Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase) were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials. A total of 45 studies (combined n = 2064) were included. Random effects model was used for meta-analysis and effect size was reported as standardized mean difference (SMD).

Results

rTMS was effective in improving fine motor function in stroke patients (SMD, 0.38; 95% CI 0.19-0.58; P = 0). On subgroup analyses, for post-stroke functional improvement of the upper extremity, bilateral hemisphere stimulation was more effective than unilateral stimulation during the acute phase of stroke, and a regimen of 20 rTMS sessions produced greater improvement than <20 sessions. In the subacute phase of stroke, affected hemispheric stimulation with a 40-session rTMS regimen was superior to unaffected hemispheric stimulation or bilateral hemispheric stimulation with <40 sessions. Unaffected site stimulation with a 10-session rTMS regimen produced significant improvement in the chronic phase compared to affected side stimulation and bilateral stimulation with >10 rTMS sessions. For the rTMS stimulation method, both TBS and rTMS were found to be significantly more effective in the acute phase of stroke, but TBS was more effective than rTMS. However, rTMS was found to be more effective than TBS stimulation in patients in the subacute and chronic phases of stroke. rTMS significantly improved upper limb and fine function in the short term (0-1-month post-intervention) and medium term (2-5 months), but not for upper limb function in the long term (6 months+). The results should be interpreted with caution due to significant heterogeneity.

Conclusions

This updated meta-analysis provides robust evidence of the efficacy of rTMS treatment in improving upper extremity and fine function during various phases of stroke.

Systematic Review Registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-5-0121/, identifier: INPLASY202250121.

Association of Long-Term Speech Therapy and Neuromodulation in Primary Progressive Aphasia: Lessons from a Case Report

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is a neurodegenerative disorder with a progressive loss of language. Long-term support requires speech therapy but also individually set training programs. Here we propose an 8-month individualized speech-training program which alternates 3-week periods of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) treatment with intensive daily language exercises and a 3-week period without tDCS treatment and a less intensive language exercise from home in a patient with non-fluent variant PPA (nfvPPA). The endpoints were the following: adherence to this program, language data after 8 months, questionnaires related to emotional valence, and brain volume changes. The results showed a persistent adherence after 8 months and a positive compliance reported by both the patient and the partner. The language evaluation showed a clinical stabilization. Moreover, a significant and positive influence of tDCS on mood was observed. This is, to our knowledge, the first ever published report of a combined neuromodulation and language training during the course of 8 months. Our finding suggests the feasibility of programs integrating hospital speech therapy, home training, and tDCS modulation in PPA. Further studies should be conducted in order to disentangle the contextual influences on language performance from the tDCS intervention effects and to address the observation of an initial improvement and a subsequent stabilization effect of language performances.

Update on Stroke Rehabilitation in Motor Impairment

Motor impairment due to stroke limits patients' mobility, activities of daily living, and negatively affects their return to the workplace. It also reduces patients' quality of life and increases the socioeconomic burden of stroke. Therefore, optimizing the recovery of motor impairment after stroke is a very important goal for both individuals and society as a whole. The emergence and improvement of various technologies in the Fourth Industrial Revolution have exerted a major influence on the development of new rehabilitation methods and efficiency enhancements for existing methods. This review categorizes rehabilitation methods that promote the recovery of motor function into upper limb function and lower limb function and summarizes recent advances in stroke rehabilitation. Although debate continues regarding the effects of some rehabilitation therapies, it is hoped that the evidence will be improved through ongoing research so that clinicians can treat patients with a higher level of evidence.

Influence of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Dosage and Associated Therapy on Motor Recovery Post-stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

(1) To determine the impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied alone or combined with other therapies on the recovery of motor function after stroke and (2) To determine tDCS dosage effect.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of tDCS with sham, using the Barthel Index (BI), the upper and lower extremity Fugl–Meyer Assessment (FMA), and the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), were retrieved from PubMed, Medline (EBSCO), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from their inception to June 2021. Calculations for each assessment were done for the overall effect and associated therapy accounting for the influence of stroke severity or stimulation parameters.

Results

A total of 31 studies involving metrics of the BI, the upper extremity FMA, the lower extremity FMA, and the MAS were included. tDCS combined with other therapies was beneficial when assessed by the BI (mean difference: 6.8; P < 0.01) and these studies typically had participants in the acute stage. tDCS effects on the upper and lower extremity FMA are unclear and differences between the sham and tDCS groups as well as differences in the associated therapy type combined with tDCS potentially influenced the FMA results. tDCS was not effective compared to sham for the MAS. Stimulation types (e.g., anodal vs. cathodal) did not influence these results and dosage parameters were not associated with the obtained effect sizes. Conventional therapy associated with tDCS typically produced greater effect size than assisted therapy. The influence of stroke severity is unclear.

Conclusion

Potential benefits of tDCS can vary depending on assessment tool used, duration of stroke, and associated therapy. Mechanistic studies are needed to understand the potential role of stimulation type and dosage effect after stroke. Future studies should carefully conduct group randomization, control for duration of stroke, and report different motor recovery assessments types.

Systematic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier [CRD42021290670].

The Adjunct of Electric Neurostimulation to Rehabilitation Approaches in Upper Limb Stroke Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

This review analyzed the current evidence and the potential for the application of electric neurostimulation such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) in upper limb stroke rehabilitation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using network meta-analysis (NMA), searching the following data bases: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, using specific keywords, from January 2010 to April 2021, and assessing the effects of "tDCS" or "VNS" combined with other therapies on upper limb motor function and activities of daily living (ADL) after stroke.

RESULTS

We included 38 RCTs with 1261 participants. Pairwise NMA showed transcutaneous VNS (tVNS) and anodal tDCS were effective in improving upper limb motor function (tVNS: mean difference [MD]: 5.50; 95% CI [0.67-11.67]; p < 0.05; anodal tDCS: MD: 5.23; 95% CI [2.45-8.01]; p < 0.05). tVNS and tDCS (anodal and cathodal) were also effective in improving ADL performance after stroke (tVNS: standard MD [SMD]: 0.96; 95% CI [0.15-2.06]; p < 0.05; anodal tDCS: SMD: 3.78; 95% CI [0.0-7.56]; p < 0.05; cathodal tDCS: SMD: 5.38; 95% CI [0.22-10.54]; p < 0.05). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve analysis revealed that tVNS is the best ranked treatment in improving upper limb motor function and performance in ADL after stroke. There was no difference in safety between VNS and its control interventions, measured by reported adverse events (VNS: risk ratio = 1.02 [95% CI = 0.48-2.17; I² = 0; p = 0.96]).

CONCLUSION

Moderate- to high-quality evidence suggests that tVNS and anodal tDCS were effective in improving upper limb motor function in both acute/subacute and chronic stroke. In addition to tVNS and anodal tDCS, cathodal tDCS is also effective in improving ADL performance after stroke.