A meta-analysis of the efficacy of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation for upper limb motor recovery in stroke survivors

Electroencephalogram Alpha Oscillations in Stroke Recovery: Insights into Neural Mechanisms from Combined Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Mirror Therapy in Relation to Activities of Daily Life

The goal of stroke rehabilitation is to establish a robust protocol for patients to live independently in community. Firstly, we examined the impact of 3 hybridized transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)-mirror therapy interventions on activities of daily life (ADL) in stroke patients. Secondly, we explored the underlying therapeutic mechanisms with theory-driven electroencephalography (EEG) indexes in the alpha band. This was achieved by identifying the unique contributions of alpha power in motor production to ADL in relation to the premotor cortex (PMC), primary cortex (M1), and Sham tDCS with mirror therapy. The results showed that, although post-intervention ADL improvement was comparable among the three tDCS groups, one of the EEG indexes differentiated the interventions. Neural-behavioral correlation analyses revealed that different types of ADL improvements consistently corresponded with alpha power in the temporal lobe exclusively in the PMC tDCS group (all rs > 0.39). By contrast, alterations in alpha power in the central-frontal region were found to vary, with ADL primarily in the M1 tDCS group (r = -0.6 or 0.7), with the benefit depending on the complexity of the ADL. In conclusion, this research suggested two potential therapeutic mechanisms and demonstrated the additive benefits of introducing theory-driven neural indexes in explaining ADL.

Kinematic descriptors of arm reaching movement are sensitive to hemisphere-specific immediate neuromodulatory effects of transcranial direct current stimulation post stroke

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) exerts beneficial effects on motor recovery after stroke, presumably by enhancement of adaptive neural plasticity. However, patients with extensive damage may experience null or deleterious effects with the predominant application mode of anodal (excitatory) stimulation of the damaged hemisphere. In such cases, excitatory stimulation of the non-damaged hemisphere might be considered. Here we asked whether tDCS exerts a measurable effect on movement quality of the hemiparetic upper limb, following just a single treatment session. Such effect may inform on the hemisphere that should be excited. Using a single-blinded crossover experimental design, stroke patients and healthy control subjects were assessed before and after anodal, cathodal and sham tDCS, each provided during a single session of reaching training (repeated point-to-point hand movement on an electronic tablet). Group comparisons of endpoint kinematics at baseline-number of peaks in the speed profile (NoP; smoothness), hand-path deviations from the straight line (SLD; accuracy) and movement time (MT; speed)-disclosed greater NoP, larger SLD and longer MT in the stroke group. NoP and MT revealed an advantage for anodal compared to sham stimulation of the lesioned hemisphere. NoP and MT improvements under anodal stimulation of the non-lesioned hemisphere correlated positively with the severity of hemiparesis. Damage to specific cortical regions and white-matter tracts was associated with lower kinematic gains from tDCS. The study shows that simple descriptors of movement kinematics of the hemiparetic upper limb are sensitive enough to demonstrate gain from neuromodulation by tDCS, following just a single session of reaching training. Moreover, the results show that tDCS-related gain is affected by the severity of baseline motor impairment, and by lesion topography.

Clinical Comparison between HD-tDCS and tDCS for Improving Upper Limb Motor Function: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Sham-Controlled Trial

Background

Stroke is a common and frequently occurring disease among middle-aged and elderly people, with approximately 55%-75% of patients remaining with upper limb dysfunction. How to promote the recovery of motor function at an early stage is crucial to the life of the patient.

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate whether high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) functional area in poststroke patients in the subacute phase is more effective in improving upper limb function than conventional tDCS.

Methods

This randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial included 69 patients with subcortical stroke. They were randomly divided into the HD-tDCS, anodal tDCS (a-tDCS), and sham groups. Each group received 20 sessions of stimulation. The patients were assessed using the Action Research Arm Test, Fugl-Meyer score for upper extremities, Motor Function Assessment Scale, and modified Barthel index (MBI) pretreatment and posttreatment.

Results

The intragroup comparison scores improved after 4 weeks of treatment. The HD-tDCS group showed a slightly greater, but nonsignificant improvement as compared to a-tDCS group in terms of mean change observed in function of trained items. The MBI score of the HD-tDCS group was maintained up to 8 weeks of follow-up and was higher than that in the a-tDCS group.

Conclusion

Both HD-tDCS and a-tDCS can improve upper limb motor function and daily activities of poststroke patients in the subacute stage. This trial is registered with ChiCTR2000031314.

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.

The impact of brain lesions on tDCS-induced electric fields

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can enhance motor and language rehabilitation after stroke. Though brain lesions distort tDCS-induced electric field (E-field), systematic accounts remain limited. Using electric field modelling, we investigated the effect of 630 synthetic lesions on E-field magnitude in the region of interest (ROI). Models were conducted for two tDCS montages targeting either primary motor cortex (M1) or Broca's area (BA44). Absolute E-field magnitude in the ROI differed by up to 42% compared to the non-lesioned brain depending on lesion size, lesion-ROI distance, and lesion conductivity value. Lesion location determined the sign of this difference: lesions in-line with the predominant direction of current increased E-field magnitude in the ROI, whereas lesions located in the opposite direction decreased E-field magnitude. We further explored how individualised tDCS can control lesion-induced effects on E-field. Lesions affected the individualised electrode configuration needed to maximise E-field magnitude in the ROI, but this effect was negligible when prioritising the maximisation of radial inward current. Lesions distorting tDCS-induced E-field, is likely to exacerbate inter-individual variability in E-field magnitude. Individualising electrode configuration and stimulator output can minimise lesion-induced variability but requires improved estimates of lesion conductivity. Individualised tDCS is critical to overcome E-field variability in lesioned brains.

Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Techniques for the Improvement of Upper Limb Motor Function and Performance in Activities of Daily Living After Stroke: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation (NiBS) such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), theta-burst stimulation (TBS), and transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) in upper limb stroke rehabilitation.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched from January 2010 to June 2022.

DATA SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of "tDCS", "rTMS", "TBS", or "taVNS" on upper limb motor function and performance in activities of daily livings (ADLs) after stroke.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

87 RCTs with 3750 participants were included. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that all NiBS except continuous TBS (cTBS) and cathodal tDCS were significantly more efficacious than sham stimulation for motor function (standardized mean difference [SMD] range 0.42-1.20), whereas taVNS, anodal tDCS, and both low and high frequency rTMS were significantly more efficacious than sham stimulation for ADLs (SMD range 0.54-0.99). NMA showed that taVNS was more effective than cTBS (SMD:1.00; 95% CI (0.02-2.02)), cathodal tDCS (SMD:1.07; 95% CI (0.21-1.92)), and Physical rehabilitation alone (SMD:1.46; 95% CI (0.59-2.33)) for improving motor function. P-score found that taVNS is best ranked treatment in improving motor function (SMD: 1.20; 95% CI (0.46-1.95)) and ADLs (SMD:1.20; 95% CI (0.45-1.94)) after stroke. After taVNS, excitatory stimulation protocols (intermittent TBS, anodal tDCS, and HF-rTMS) are most effective in improving motor function and ADLs after acute/sub-acute (SMD range 0.53-1.63) and chronic stroke (SMD range 0.39-1.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that excitatory stimulation protocols are the most promising intervention in improving upper limb motor function and performance in ADLs. taVNS appeared to be a promising intervention for stroke patients, but further large RCTs are required to confirm its relative superiority.

Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation in combination with robotic therapy in upper limb impairments in people with stroke: a systematic review

Background

Stroke is a devastating condition, which not only affects patients’ activity, but also is a primary reason for the psychosocial impact on them, their caregivers, and the healthcare system. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) modulates cortical activity, encouraging neuro-modulation and motor recovery in stroke rehabilitation. Robotic therapy (RT) provides repetitive, high-intensity, interactive, task-specific intervention and can measure changes while providing feedback to people with stroke.

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate and summarize the scientific literature systematically to investigate the combined effect of tDCS and RT in patients with stroke.

Methods

Four databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, & PEDro) were searched for clinical trials investigating the effect of RT and tDCS in stroke patients with upper limb impairment. PEDro scale was used for the quality assessment of included studies.

Results

The search yielded 208 articles. A total of 213 patients with stroke who had upper limb impairment were studied. In the majority of the trials, RT combined with tDCS lead to positive improvement in various measures of upper limb function and spasticity.

Conclusions

RT along with tDCS is an effective mode of rehabilitation, although no additional effects of tDCS plus RT in comparison with RT alone were reported. Large, robust studies are needed, so that health care providers and researchers can make better decisions about merging tDCS and RT in stroke rehabilitation settings in the future.

Electroceutical and Bioelectric Therapy: Its Advantages and Limitations

Given the long history, the field of electroceutical and bioelectric therapy has grown impressively, recognized as the main modality of mental health treatments along with psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy. Electroceutical and bioelectric therapy comprises electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), and other brain stimulation techniques. Much empirical research has been published regarding the application guidelines, mechanism of action, and efficacy of respective brain stimulation techniques, but no comparative study that delineates the advantages and limitations of each therapy exists for a comprehensive understanding of each technique. This review provides a comparison of existing electroceutical and bioelectric techniques, primarily focusing on the therapeutic advantages and limitations of each therapy in the current electroceutical and bioelectric field.

Electric field simulations of transcranial direct current stimulation in children with perinatal stroke

Introduction

Perinatal stroke (PS) is a focal vascular brain injury and the leading cause of hemiparetic cerebral palsy. Motor impairments last a lifetime but treatments are limited. Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) may enhance motor learning in adults but tDCS effects on motor learning are less studied in children. Imaging-based simulations of tDCS-induced electric fields (EF) suggest differences in the developing brain compared to adults but have not been applied to common pediatric disease states. We created estimates of tDCS-induced EF strength using five tDCS montages targeting the motor system in children with PS [arterial ischemic stroke (AIS) or periventricular infarction (PVI)] and typically developing controls (TDC) aged 6-19 years to explore associates between simulation values and underlying anatomy.

Methods

Simulations were performed using SimNIBS https://simnibs.github.io/simnibs/build/html/index.html using T1, T2, and diffusion-weighted images. After tissue segmentation and tetrahedral mesh generation, tDCS-induced EF was estimated based on the finite element model (FEM). Five 1mA tDCS montages targeting motor function in the paretic (non-dominant) hand were simulated. Estimates of peak EF strength, EF angle, field focality, and mean EF in motor cortex (M1) were extracted for each montage and compared between groups.

Results

Simulations for eighty-three children were successfully completed (21 AIS, 30 PVI, 32 TDC). Conventional tDCS montages utilizing anodes over lesioned cortex had higher peak EF strength values for the AIS group compared to TDC. These montages showed lower mean EF strength within target M1 regions suggesting that peaks were not necessarily localized to motor network-related targets. EF angle was lower for TDC compared to PS groups for a subset of montages. Montages using anodes over lesioned cortex were more sensitive to variations in underlying anatomy (lesion and tissue volumes) than those using cathodes over non-lesioned cortex.

Discussion

Individualized patient-centered tDCS EF simulations are prudent for clinical trial planning and may provide insight into the efficacy of tDCS interventions in children with PS.

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.

Effects of Bihemispheric Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Repetitive Peripheral Nerve Stimulation in Acute Stroke Patients

PURPOSE

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can change the excitability of the central nervous system and contribute to motor recovery of stroke patients. The aim of our study was to examine the short- and long-term effects of real versus sham bihemispheric tDCS combined with repetitive peripheral nerve stimulation in patients with acute stroke and a severe motor impairment.

METHODS

The study was prospective, randomized, double blind, and placebo controlled. Nineteen acute stroke patients (ischemic and hemorrhagic) with upper limb Fugl-Meyer mean score of <19 were randomized in two groups: one group received five consecutive daily sessions of anodal tDCS over the affected hemisphere and cathodal over unaffected hemisphere combined with repetitive peripheral nerve stimulation and the other received sham tDCS associated to repetitive peripheral nerve stimulation. Clinical and neurophysiological assessment was applied before tDCS, 5 days after tDCS, and 3, 6, and 12 months after tDCS.

RESULTS

There were significant time-related changes in both groups of patients in motor evoked potentials, somatosensory evoked potentials, Hmax:Mmax ratio, upper limb Fugl-Meyer scores, and Modified Ashworth scales scores ( P < 0.05). However, no significant differences between groups were present at any time ( P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Bihemispheric tDCS and repetitive peripheral nerve stimulation with the parameters of our study did not add significant short- or long-term clinical improvement or change in neurophysiological data in severe acute stroke patients in comparison to sham stimulation. The severity of motor impairment in stroke patients may influence a possible response to an interventional tDCS treatment.

MRI-Based Personalized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Enhance the Upper Limb Function in Patients with Stroke: Study Protocol for a Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to have the potential to improve the motor recovery of the affected upper limbs in patients with stroke, and recently, several optimized tDCS methods have been proposed to magnify its effectiveness. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of personalized tDCS using brain MRI-based electrical field simulation and optimization, to enhance motor recovery of the upper limbs in the patients. This trial is a double-blind, randomized controlled trial in the subacute to chronic rehabilitation phase. Forty-two adult stroke patients with unilateral upper limb involvement will be randomly allocated to three groups: (1) personalized tDCS with MRI-based electrical field simulation and optimized stimulation, (2) conventional tDCS with bihemispheric stimulation of the primary motor cortex, and (3) sham tDCS. All three groups will undergo 10 intervention sessions with 30 min of 2-mA intensity stimulation, during a regular upper limb rehabilitation program over two weeks. The primary outcome measure for the motor recovery of the upper limb impairment is the Fugl-Meyer assessment for the upper extremity score at the end of the intervention, and the secondary measures include changes in the motor evoked potentials, the frequency power and coherence of the electroencephalography, performance in activities of daily living, and adverse events with a 1-month follow-up assessment. The primary outcome will be analyzed on the intention-to-treat principle. There is a paucity of studies regarding the effectiveness of personalized and optimized tDCS that considers individual brain lesions and electrical field characteristics in the real world. No feasibility or pivotal studies have been performed in stroke patients using brain MRI, to determine a lesion-specific tDCS simulation and optimization that considers obstacles in the segmentation and analysis of the affected brain tissue, such as ischemic and hemorrhagic lesions. This trial will contribute to addressing the effectiveness and safety of personalized tDCS, using brain MRI-based electrical field simulation and optimization, to enhance the motor recovery of the upper limbs in patients with stroke.

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.

Effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation on hand dexterity in stroke patients: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Hand dexterity is the ability to execute the skilful movements using the hand and fingers. It is commonly impaired poststroke resulting in a profound deterioration in the quality of life for patients with stroke. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a form of non-invasive brain stimulation, which has gained a popularity as an adjunct therapy in recovering motor dysfunction poststroke. Promising results have been gained from applying tDCS in combination with motor rehabilitation, however, the outcome of tDCS on the upper limb motor function poststroke has been varied. Different results are potentially related to the discrepancy of the area of brain stimulation. Therefore, we aim to enhance the application of tDCS to improve its effectiveness in recovering hand dexterity through testing our hypothesis that stimulating the primary motor cortex could improve fine dexterity more than gross dexterity.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol has been reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science and CINAHL databases will be searched with no restriction in language and publication date. The selected studies will be randomised controlled trial investigating the effect of tDCS alone or in combination with motor rehabilitation in improving hand dexterity of patients with stroke with upper limb hemiparesis. The outcomes of interest are fine and gross hand dexterity measures. Two independent reviewers will assess the eligibility of the study, extract data and appraise the methodological quality. The data will be pooled in a meta-analysis if applicable or interpreted narratively. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to assess the overall quality of evidence for the fine and gross dexterity measures.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required for this study. The dissemination plan is to publish the results in a peer-review journal and presenting results in a conference.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021262186.

Effect of cognitive task complexity on dual task postural stability: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The dual task experimental paradigm is used to probe the attentional requirements of postural control. However, findings of dual task postural studies have been inconsistent with many studies even reporting improvement in postural stability during dual tasking and thus raising questions about cognitive involvement in postural control. A U-shaped non-linear relationship has been hypothesized between cognitive task complexity and dual task postural stability suggesting that the inconsistent results might have arisen from the use of cognitive tasks of varying complexities. To systematically review experimental studies that compared the effect of simple and complex cognitive tasks on postural stability during dual tasking, we searched seven electronic databases for relevant studies published between 1980 to September 2020. 33 studies involving a total of 1068 participants met the review's inclusion criteria, 17 of which were included in meta-analysis (healthy young adults: 15 studies, 281 participants; Stroke patients: 2 studies, 52 participants). Narrative synthesis of the findings in studies involving healthy old adults was carried out. Our result suggests that in healthy population, cognitive task complexity may not determine whether postural stability increases or decreases during dual tasking (effect of cognitive task complexity was not statistically significant; P > 0.1), and thus the U-shaped non-linear hypothesis is not supported. Rather, differential effect of dual tasking on postural stability was observed mainly based on the age of the participants and postural task challenge, implying that the involvement of cognitive resources or higher cortical functions in the control of postural stability may largely depends on these two factors.

Contralesional Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Does Not Enhance Upper Limb Function in Subacute Stroke: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has the potential to improve upper limb motor outcomes after stroke. According to the assumption of interhemispheric inhibition, excessive inhibition from the motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere to the motor cortex of the affected hemisphere may worsen upper limb motor recovery after stroke. We evaluated the effects of active cathodal tDCS of the primary motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere (ctDCSM1_UH) compared to sham, in subjects within 72 hours to 6 weeks post ischemic stroke. Cathodal tDCS was intended to inhibit the motor cortex of the unaffected hemisphere and hence decrease the inhibition from the unaffected to the affected hemisphere and enhance motor recovery. We hypothesized that motor recovery would be greater in the active than in the sham group. In addition, greater motor recovery in the active group might be associated with bigger improvements in measures in activity and participation in the active than in the sham group. We also explored, for the first time, changes in cognition and sleep after ctDCSM1_UH. Thirty subjects were randomized to six sessions of either active or sham ctDCSM1_UH as add-on interventions to rehabilitation. The NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS), Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Motor Recovery after Stroke (FMA), Barthel Index (BI), Stroke Impact Scale (SIS), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were assessed before, after treatment, and three months later. In the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis, there were significant GROUP∗TIME interactions reflecting stronger gains in the sham group for scores in NIHSS, FMA, BI, MoCA, and four SIS domains. At three months post intervention, the sham group improved significantly compared to posttreatment in FMA, NIHSS, BI, and three SIS domains while no significant changes occurred in the active group. Also at three months, NIHSS improved significantly in the sham group and worsened significantly in the active group. FMA scores at baseline were higher in the active than in the sham group. After adjustment of analysis according to baseline scores, the between-group differences in FMA changes were no longer statistically significant. Finally, none of the between-group differences in changes in outcomes after treatment were considered clinically relevant. In conclusion, active CtDCSM1_UH did not have beneficial effects, compared to sham. These results were consistent with other studies that applied comparable tDCS intensities/current densities or treated subjects with severe upper limb motor impairments during the first weeks post stroke. Dose-finding studies early after stroke are necessary before planning larger clinical trials.

Brain Functional Changes in Stroke Following Rehabilitation Using Brain-Computer Interface-Assisted Motor Imagery With and Without tDCS: A Pilot Study

Brain-computer interface-assisted motor imagery (MI-BCI) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been proven effective in post-stroke motor function enhancement, yet whether the combination of MI-BCI and tDCS may further benefit the rehabilitation of motor functions remains unknown. This study investigated brain functional activity and connectivity changes after a 2 week MI-BCI and tDCS combined intervention in 19 chronic subcortical stroke patients. Patients were randomized into MI-BCI with tDCS group and MI-BCI only group who underwent 10 sessions of 20 min real or sham tDCS followed by 1 h MI-BCI training with robotic feedback. We derived amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF), regional homogeneity (ReHo), and functional connectivity (FC) from resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data pre- and post-intervention. At baseline, stroke patients had lower ALFF in the ipsilesional somatomotor network (SMN), lower ReHo in the contralesional insula, and higher ALFF/Reho in the bilateral posterior default mode network (DMN) compared to age-matched healthy controls. After the intervention, the MI-BCI only group showed increased ALFF in contralesional SMN and decreased ALFF/Reho in the posterior DMN. In contrast, no post-intervention changes were detected in the MI-BCI + tDCS group. Furthermore, higher increases in ALFF/ReHo/FC measures were related to better motor function recovery (measured by the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scores) in the MI-BCI group while the opposite association was detected in the MI-BCI + tDCS group. Taken together, our findings suggest that brain functional re-normalization and network-specific compensation were found in the MI-BCI only group but not in the MI-BCI + tDCS group although both groups gained significant motor function improvement post-intervention with no group difference. MI-BCI and tDCS may exert differential or even opposing impact on brain functional reorganization during post-stroke motor rehabilitation; therefore, the integration of the two strategies requires further refinement to improve efficacy and effectiveness.

Effectiveness of a combined transcranial direct current stimulation and virtual reality-based intervention on upper limb function in chronic individuals post-stroke with persistent severe hemiparesis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Functional impairments derived from the non-use of severely affected upper limb after stroke have been proposed to be mitigated by action observation and imagination-based techniques, whose effectiveness is enhanced when combined with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Preliminary studies in mildly impaired individuals in the acute phase post-stroke show intensified effects when action is facilitated by tDCS and mediated by virtual reality (VR) but the effectiveness in cases of severe impairment and chronic stroke is unknown. This study investigated the effectiveness of a combined tDCS and VR-based intervention in the sensorimotor function of chronic individuals post-stroke with persistent severe hemiparesis compared to conventional physical therapy.

METHODS

Twenty-nine participants were randomized into an experimental group, who received 30 minutes of the combined tDCS and VR-based therapy and 30 minutes of conventional physical therapy, or a control group, who exclusively received conventional physical therapy focusing on passive and active assistive range of motion exercises. The sensorimotor function of all participants was assessed before and after 25 one-hour sessions, administered three to five times a week, using the upper extremity subscale of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, the time and ability subscales of the Wolf Motor Function Test, and the Nottingham Sensory Assessment.

RESULTS

A clinically meaningful improvement of the upper limb motor function was consistently revealed in all motor measures after the experimental intervention, but not after conventional physical therapy. Similar limited effects were detected in the sensory function in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The combined tDCS and VR-based paradigm provided not only greater but also clinically meaningful improvement in the motor function (and similar sensory effects) in comparison to conventional physical therapy.

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

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review how patient characteristics and/or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) parameters influence tDCS effectiveness in respect to upper limb function post-stroke.

METHODS

Three electronic databases were searched for sham-controlled randomised trials using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for upper extremity as outcome measure. A meta-analysis and nine subgroup-analyses were performed to identify which tDCS parameters yielded the greatest impact on upper limb function recovery in stroke patients.

RESULTS

Eighteen high-quality studies (507 patients) were included. tDCS applied in a chronic stage yields greater results than tDCS applied in a (sub)acute stage. Additionally, patients with low baseline upper limb impairments seem to benefit more from tDCS than those with high baseline impairments. Regarding tDCS configuration, all stimulation types led to a significant improvement, but only tDCS applied during therapy, and not before therapy, yielded significant results. A positive dose-response relationship was identified for current/charge density and stimulation duration, but not for number of sessions.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrate that tDCS improves upper limb function post-stroke. However, its effectiveness depends on numerous factors. Especially chronic stroke patients improved, which is promising as they are typically least amenable to recovery.

SIGNIFICANCE

The current work highlights the importance of several patient-related and protocol-related factors regarding tDCS effectiveness.

From adults to pediatrics: A review noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) to facilitate recovery from brain injury

Stroke is a major problem worldwide that impacts over 100 million adults and children annually. Rehabilitation therapy is the current standard of care to restore functional impairments post-stroke, however its effects are limited and many patients suffer persisting functional impairments and life-long disability. Noninvasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) has emerged as a potential rehabilitation treatment option in both adults and children with brain injury. In the last decade, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation (taVNS) have been investigated to improve motor recovery in adults post-stroke. These promising adult findings using NIBS, however, have yet to be widely translated to the area of pediatrics. The limited studies exploring NIBS in children have demonstrated safety, feasibility, and utility of stimulation-augmented rehabilitation. This chapter will describe the mechanism of NIBS therapy (cortical excitability, neuroplasticity) that underlies its use in stroke and motor function and how TMS, tDCS, and taVNS are applied in adult stroke treatment paradigms. We will then discuss the current state of NIBS in early pediatric brain injury and will provide insight regarding practical considerations and future applications of NIBS in pediatrics to make this promising treatment option a viable therapy in children.

[Transcranial direct current stimulation in neurology and psychiatry]

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive method of modulating brain excitability by low intensity direct current. At present, there are numerous studies of tDCS application in various mental and neurological diseases. In this review, the data of tDCS efficiency in the treatment of different disorders are presented and the recommendations on using this method in clinical practice are given.

Towards a common template for neural reinforcement of finger individuation

The inability to individuate finger movements is a common impairment following stroke. Conventional physical therapy ignores underlying neural changes with recovery, leaving it unclear why sensorimotor function often remains impaired. Functional MRI neurofeedback can monitor neural activity and reinforce it towards a healthy template to restore function. However, identifying an individualized training template may not be possible depending on the severity of impairment. In this study, we investigated the use of functional alignment of brain data across healthy participants to create an idealized neural template to be used as a training target for new participants. We employed multi-voxel pattern analyses to assess the prediction accuracy and robustness to missing data of pre-trained functional templates corresponding to individual finger presses. We found a significant improvement in classification accuracy (p < 0.001) of individual finger presses when group data was aligned based on function (88%) rather than anatomy (46%). Importantly, we found no significant drop in performance when aligning a new participant to a pre-established template as compared to including this new participant in the creation of a new template. These results indicate that functionally aligned templates could provide an effective surrogate training target for patients following neurological injury.

Evaluation of upper extremity function and its relation to curve pattern in female adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis: a pilot study

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional and clinical measurement.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate upper extremity function and its relation to the curve pattern in idiopathic scoliosis. Postural alterations and trunk distortions-caused by three-dimensional deformity itself in idiopathic scoliosis-may lead to functional changes in the upper extremity of subjects.

METHODS

Handgrip, pulp and lateral pinch strengths, hand dexterity, hand reaction time, coordination of upper extremity, upper extremity performance, throwing accuracy, and self-reported upper extremity disability were evaluated in 96 subjects. These subjects were divided into 3 groups: 47 with main thoracic curve pattern scoliosis (Lenke type 1), 31 with thoracolumbar/lumbar curve pattern scoliosis (Lenke type 5), and 18 unaffected (healthy control). Comparisons were performed between these three groups.

RESULTS

The thoracic scoliosis group showed a significant decrease in concave lateral pinch strength, concave hand dexterity of turning, coordination of the upper extremities, and concave hand reaction time than the thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis group (p < 0.05). Bilateral handgrip strengths decreased in thoracic scoliosis group when compared to healthy controls. Healthy individuals demonstrated greater throwing accuracy than individuals with scoliosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Upper extremity function was found to be affected based on the curve pattern. Individuals with main thoracic curves are likely to have deteriorated upper extremity function, especially for hand-specific motor skills, on the concave side, when compared to lumbar curves and healthy controls.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Baseline Motor Impairment Predicts Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined with Physical Therapy-Induced Improvement in Individuals with Chronic Stroke

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can enhance the effect of conventional therapies in post-stroke neurorehabilitation. The ability to predict an individual's potential for tDCS-induced recovery may permit rehabilitation providers to make rational decisions about who will be a good candidate for tDCS therapy. We investigated the clinical and biological characteristics which might predict tDCS plus physical therapy effects on upper limb motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. A cohort of 80 chronic stroke individuals underwent ten to fifteen sessions of tDCS plus physical therapy. The sensorimotor function of the upper limb was assessed by means of the upper extremity section of the Fugl-Meyer scale (UE-FM), before and after treatment. A backward stepwise regression was used to assess the effect of age, sex, time since stroke, brain lesion side, and basal level of motor function on UE-FM improvement after treatment. Following the intervention, UE-FM significantly improved (p < 0.05), and the magnitude of the change was clinically important (mean 6.2 points, 95% CI: 5.2-7.4). The baseline level of UE-FM was the only significant predictor (R 2 = 0.90, F (1, 76) = 682.80, p < 0.001) of tDCS response. These findings may help to guide clinical decisions according to the profile of each patient. Future studies should investigate whether stroke severity affects the effectiveness of tDCS combined with physical therapy.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving activities of daily living, and physical and cognitive functioning, in people after stroke

BACKGROUND

Stroke is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Functional impairment, resulting in poor performance in activities of daily living (ADL) among stroke survivors is common. Current rehabilitation approaches have limited effectiveness in improving ADL performance, function, muscle strength, and cognitive abilities (including spatial neglect) after stroke, with improving cognition being the number one research priority in this field. A possible adjunct to stroke rehabilitation might be non-invasive brain stimulation by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to modulate cortical excitability, and hence to improve these outcomes in people after stroke.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of tDCS on ADL, arm and leg function, muscle strength and cognitive abilities (including spatial neglect), dropouts and adverse events in people after stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and seven other databases in January 2019. In an effort to identify further published, unpublished, and ongoing trials, we also searched trials registers and reference lists, handsearched conference proceedings, and contacted authors and equipment manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

This is the update of an existing review. In the previous version of this review, we focused on the effects of tDCS on ADL and function. In this update, we broadened our inclusion criteria to compare any kind of active tDCS for improving ADL, function, muscle strength and cognitive abilities (including spatial neglect) versus any kind of placebo or control intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and risk of bias, extracted data, and applied GRADE criteria. If necessary, we contacted study authors to ask for additional information. We collected information on dropouts and adverse events from the trial reports.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 67 studies involving a total of 1729 patients after stroke. We also identified 116 ongoing studies. The risk of bias did not differ substantially for different comparisons and outcomes. The majority of participants had ischaemic stroke, with mean age between 43 and 75 years, in the acute, postacute, and chronic phase after stroke, and level of impairment ranged from severe to less severe. Included studies differed in terms of type, location and duration of stimulation, amount of current delivered, electrode size and positioning, as well as type and location of stroke. We found 23 studies with 781 participants examining the effects of tDCS versus sham tDCS (or any other passive intervention) on our primary outcome measure, ADL after stroke. Nineteen studies with 686 participants reported absolute values and showed evidence of effect regarding ADL performance at the end of the intervention period (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.44; random-effects model; moderate-quality evidence). Four studies with 95 participants reported change scores, and showed an effect (SMD 0.48, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.95; moderate-quality evidence). Six studies with 269 participants assessed the effects of tDCS on ADL at the end of follow-up and provided absolute values, and found improved ADL (SMD 0.31, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.62; moderate-quality evidence). One study with 16 participants provided change scores and found no effect (SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.66 to 0.37; low-quality evidence). However, the results did not persist in a sensitivity analysis that included only trials with proper allocation concealment. Thirty-four trials with a total of 985 participants measured upper extremity function at the end of the intervention period. Twenty-four studies with 792 participants that presented absolute values found no effect in favour of tDCS (SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.38; moderate-quality evidence). Ten studies with 193 participants that presented change values also found no effect (SMD 0.33, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.79; low-quality evidence). Regarding the effects of tDCS on upper extremity function at the end of follow-up, we identified five studies with a total of 211 participants (absolute values) without an effect (SMD -0.00, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.39; moderate-quality evidence). Three studies with 72 participants presenting change scores found an effect (SMD 1.07; 95% CI 0.04 to 2.11; low-quality evidence). Twelve studies with 258 participants reported outcome data for lower extremity function and 18 studies with 553 participants reported outcome data on muscle strength at the end of the intervention period, but there was no effect (high-quality evidence). Three studies with 156 participants reported outcome data on muscle strength at follow-up, but there was no evidence of an effect (moderate-quality evidence). Two studies with 56 participants found no evidence of effect of tDCS on cognitive abilities (low-quality evidence), but one study with 30 participants found evidence of effect of tDCS for improving spatial neglect (very low-quality evidence). In 47 studies with 1330 participants, the proportions of dropouts and adverse events were comparable between groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.13; random-effects model; moderate-quality evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of very low to moderate quality on the effectiveness of tDCS versus control (sham intervention or any other intervention) for improving ADL outcomes after stroke. However, the results did not persist in a sensitivity analyses including only trials with proper allocation concealment. Evidence of low to high quality suggests that there is no effect of tDCS on arm function and leg function, muscle strength, and cognitive abilities in people after stroke. Evidence of very low quality suggests that there is an effect on hemispatial neglect. There was moderate-quality evidence that adverse events and numbers of people discontinuing the treatment are not increased. Future studies should particularly engage with patients who may benefit the most from tDCS after stroke, but also should investigate the effects in routine application. Therefore, further large-scale randomised controlled trials with a parallel-group design and sample size estimation for tDCS are needed.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been investigated as a tool for dysphagia recovery after stroke in several single-center randomized controlled trials (RCT).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this investigation was to quantitatively evaluate the effect of tDCS on dysphagia recovery after a stroke utilizing a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Major databases were searched through October 2019 using a pre-defined set of criteria. Any RCT investigating the efficacy of tDCS in post-stroke dysphagia using a standardized dysphagia scale as outcome measure was included. Studies were assessed for risk of bias and quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Effect sizes were calculated from extracted data and entered into a random effects analysis to obtain pooled estimates of the effect.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs with a total sample size of 217 patients fulfilled the criteria and were included in the analysis. The overall results revealed a small but statistically significant pooled effect size (0.31; CI 0.03, 0.59; p = 0.03). The subgroup which explored the stimulation intensity yielded a moderately significant effect size for the low-intensity stimulation group (g = 0.44; CI = 0.08, 0.81 vs. g = 0.15, CI - 0.30, 0.61). For the other subgroup analyses, neither comparisons of affected vs. unaffected hemisphere or acute vs. chronic stroke phase revealed a significant result.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrates a modest but significant beneficial effect of tDCS on improving post-stroke dysphagia. Whether benefits from this intervention are more pronounced in certain patient subgroups and with specific stimulation protocols requires further investigation.

Early non-invasive brain stimulation with modified constraint-induced movement therapy for motor and functional upper limb recovery in stroke patients: Study protocol

Introduction

Upper limb motor impairment after a stroke is an important sequela. Constraint-induced movement therapy is a rehabilitation approach that has strong evidence. The incorporation of transcranial direct-current stimulation has been proposed; however, there is a lack of studies that confirm its benefits. The principal aim is to compare the effectiveness of 7 days of active versus sham bi-hemispheric transcranial direct-current stimulation, combined with modified constraint-induced movement therapy, for motor and functional recovery of the hemiparetic upper limb in subacute stroke patients.

Method/design

Randomized, double blind, sham-controlled, parallel group clinical trial in two stroke units. Participants: adults over 18 years, at least 2 days post unihemispheric stroke event, with hemiparesis, and without severe pain, aphasia or cognitive impairment. Intervention: Patients will receive 7 days of continuous therapy and be assigned to one of the treatment groups: active bi-hemispheric transcranial direct-current stimulation or sham bi-hemispheric transcranial direct-current stimulation. Measurement: Evaluations will take place at days 0, 5, 7 and 10, and at 3rd months. The Fugl-Meyer Assessment – Upper Extremity, Wolf Motor Function Test, Functional Independence Measure and Stroke Impact Scale are considered.

Discussion

Modified constraint-induced movement therapy plus transcranial direct-current stimulation in subacute stroke patients with hemiparesis could maximize motor and functional recovery. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03452254.

Neurostimulation and Reach-to-Grasp Function Recovery Following Acquired Brain Injury: Insight From Pre-clinical Rodent Models and Human Applications

Reach-to-grasp is an evolutionarily conserved motor function that is adversely impacted following stroke and traumatic brain injury (TBI). Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) methods, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation, are promising tools that could enhance functional recovery of reach-to-grasp post-brain injury. Though the rodent literature provides a causal understanding of post-injury recovery mechanisms, it has had a limited impact on NIBS protocols in human research. The high degree of homology in reach-to-grasp circuitry between humans and rodents further implies that the application of NIBS to brain injury could be better informed by findings from pre-clinical rodent models and neurorehabilitation research. Here, we provide an overview of the advantages and limitations of using rodent models to advance our current understanding of human reach-to-grasp function, cortical circuitry, and reorganization. We propose that a cross-species comparison of reach-to-grasp recovery could provide a mechanistic framework for clinically efficacious NIBS treatments that could elicit better functional outcomes for patients.

Timing-dependent effects of transcranial direct current stimulation with mirror therapy on daily function and motor control in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study

Background

The timing of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with neurorehabilitation interventions may affect its modulatory effects. Motor function has been reported to be modulated by the timing of tDCS; however, whether the timing of tDCS would also affect restoration of daily function and upper extremity motor control with neurorehabilitation in stroke patients remains largely unexplored. Mirror therapy (MT) is a potentially effective neurorehabilitation approach for improving paretic arm function in stroke patients. This study aimed to determine whether the timing of tDCS with MT would influence treatment effects on daily function, motor function and motor control in individuals with chronic stroke.

Methods

This study was a double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Twenty-eight individuals with chronic stroke received one of the following three interventions: (1) sequentially combined tDCS with MT (SEQ), (2) concurrently combined tDCS with MT (CON), and (3) sham tDCS with MT (SHAM). Participants received interventions for 90 min/day, 5 days/week for 4 weeks. Daily function was assessed using the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living Scale. Upper extremity motor function was assessed using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale. Upper extremity motor control was evaluated using movement kinematic assessments.

Results

There were significant differences in daily function between the three groups. The SEQ group had greater improvement in daily function than the CON and SHAM groups. Kinematic analyses showed that movement time of the paretic hand significantly reduced in the SEQ group after interventions. All three groups had significant improvement in motor function from pre-intervention to post-intervention.

Conclusion

The timing of tDCS with MT may influence restoration of daily function and movement efficiency of the paretic hand in chronic stroke patients. Sequentially applying tDCS prior to MT seems to be advantageous for enhancing daily function and hand movement control, and may be considered as a potentially useful strategy in future clinical application.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02827864. Registered on 29th June, 2016.

Study of the Functional Brain Connectivity and Lower-Limb Motor Imagery Performance After Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

The use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been related to the improvement of motor and learning tasks. The current research studies the effects of an asymmetric tDCS setup over brain connectivity, when the subject is performing a motor imagery (MI) task during five consecutive days. A brain–computer interface (BCI) based on electroencephalography is simulated in offline analysis to study the effect that tDCS has over different electrode configurations for the BCI. This way, the BCI performance is used as a validation index of the effect of the tDCS setup by the analysis of the classifier accuracy of the experimental sessions. In addition, the relationship between the brain connectivity and the BCI accuracy performance is analyzed. Results indicate that tDCS group, in comparison to the placebo sham group, shows a higher significant number of connectivity interactions in the motor electrodes during MI tasks and an increasing BCI accuracy over the days. However, the asymmetric tDCS setup does not improve the BCI performance of the electrodes in the intended hemisphere.

Effect of transcranial direct-current stimulation on cognitive function in stroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive approach that can alter brain excitability. Several studies have shown the effectiveness of tDCS in improving language and movement function in stroke patients. However, the effect of tDCS on cognitive function after stroke remains uncertain.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the China Science and Technology Journal Database, and the Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform from inception to April 2, 2019. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and evaluated the quality of the included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. All statistical analyses were performed in RevMan 5.3, and the mean difference (MD) or standard mean difference (SMD) were used as the pooled statistics.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies involving 820 participants were included. When compared with passive tDCS, anodal tDCS was associated with improved general cognitive performance as examined by the Minimum Mental State Examination or Montreal Cognitive Assessment (SMD = 1.31, 95% CI 0.91-1.71, P < 0.00001), attention performance (SMD = 0.66, 95% CI 0.11-1.20, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in memory performance (SMD = 0.41, 95% CI -0.67-1.50, P = 0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

tDCS is likely to be effective for patients with cognitive impairment after stroke. The evidence for different effects based on population characteristics and stimulation methods was limited, but a real effect cannot be ruled out. More high-quality research in this field is required to determine the potential benefits of tDCS in the treatment of cognitive deficits after stroke and to establish the optimal treatment program.

Effects of chronic antidepressant use on neurophysiological responses to tDCS post-stroke

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) induces neuroplastic changes in the motor cortex of healthy individuals and has become a candidate intervention to promote recovery post-stroke. However, neurophysiological effects of tDCS in stroke are poorly understood. Antidepressant medications, which are commonly prescribed post-stroke, have the potential to significantly affect cortical excitability and alter responsiveness to tDCS interventions, yet these effects have not previously been examined.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

To examine the effects of chronic antidepressant use, tDCS, and the interaction of the two on motor cortical excitability in people with chronic stroke. Based on previous literature in nondisabled adults, we hypothesized that post-stroke, antidepressant-takers would show decreased baseline motor cortical excitability but enhanced responsiveness to anodal tDCS.

METHODS

Twenty-six participants with chronic stroke (17 control, 9 antidepressant) received real and sham anodal tDCS during separate sessions at least a week apart. Motor cortical excitability was measured before and after tDCS was applied to the lesioned hemisphere primary motor cortex. We compared baseline cortical excitability and neurophysiological responses to tDCS between groups and sessions.

RESULTS

Baseline motor cortical excitability was not different between control and antidepressant groups. Following anodal tDCS over the ipsilesional primary motor cortex, cortical excitability in the non-lesioned hemisphere decreased in controls, but, surprisingly, increased in antidepressant-takers.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic antidepressant use may not affect motor cortical excitability post-stroke, however it appears to reverse some of the expected effects of tDCS. Therefore future utilization of tDCS in post-stroke neurorehabilitation research should take antidepressant medication status into account.

Different Therapeutic Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper and Lower Limb Recovery of Stroke Patients with Motor Dysfunction: A Meta-Analysis

Objective

To explore the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the motor recovery of stroke patients and the effect differences between the upper limb and lower limb.

Methods

Randomized control trials published until January 2019 were searched from PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library databases. The standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated separately for upper and lower limb motor outcomes to understand the mean effect size.

Results

Twenty-nine studies with 664 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. The overall analyses of tDCS demonstrated significant effect size both for the upper limb (SMD = 0.26, P = 0.002) and the lower limb (SMD = 0.47, P = 0.002). Compared with acute and subacute stroke patients, chronic stroke patients obtained significant effects after tDCS (SMD = 0.25, P = 0.03) in upper limb function. Furthermore, both anode and cathode stimulations produced significant effect size for stroke patients after ≤10 sessions of tDCS (anode: SMD = 0.40, P = 0.001; cathode: SMD = 0.79, P < 0.0001) with >0.029 mA/cm² of density (anode: SMD = 0.46, P = 0.002; cathode: SMD = 0.79, P < 0.0001). But for lower limb function, more prominent effects were found in subacute stroke patients (SMD = 0.56, P = 0.001) with bilateral tDCS (SMD = 0.59, p = 0.009).

Conclusion

tDCS is effective for the recovery of stroke patients with motor dysfunction. In addition, upper limb and lower limb functions obtain distinct effects from different therapeutic parameters of tDCS at different stages, respectively.

Beyond the target area: an integrative view of tDCS-induced motor cortex modulation in patients and athletes

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive technique used to modulate neural tissue. Neuromodulation apparently improves cognitive functions in several neurologic diseases treatment and sports performance. In this study, we present a comprehensive, integrative review of tDCS for motor rehabilitation and motor learning in healthy individuals, athletes and multiple neurologic and neuropsychiatric conditions. We also report on neuromodulation mechanisms, main applications, current knowledge including areas such as language, embodied cognition, functional and social aspects, and future directions. We present the use and perspectives of new developments in tDCS technology, namely high-definition tDCS (HD-tDCS) which promises to overcome one of the main tDCS limitation (i.e., low focality) and its application for neurological disease, pain relief, and motor learning/rehabilitation. Finally, we provided information regarding the Transcutaneous Spinal Direct Current Stimulation (tsDCS) in clinical applications, Cerebellar tDCS (ctDCS) and its influence on motor learning, and TMS combined with electroencephalography (EEG) as a tool to evaluate tDCS effects on brain function.

Transcranial direct current stimulation associated with physical-therapy in acute stroke patients - A randomized, triple blind, sham-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation has been increasing in popularity in the last few years. Despite vast amounts of articles on the use of tDCS on stroke patients, very little has been done during the acute phase.

OBJECTIVES

Measure the effects of tDCS on functional and sensory outcomes throughout the first year post onset of stroke.

METHODS

50 acute stroke patients were randomized and placed into either the treatment or sham group. Anodal tDCS was applied (2 mA, 20 min) 5 times a week during the first month post stroke. Patients were evaluated with the Wolf Motor Function Test, the Semmes Weinstein Monofilament Test, the Upper Extremity section (UEFM), the Lower Extremity section (LEFM) and the Somatosensory section of the Fugl Meyer Test, the Tardieu Spasticity Scale, the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Barthel Index. Evaluations were held at 48 h post stroke, week 1, 2, 3, 4, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year.

RESULTS

There were statistically and clinically significant improvements after tDCS in all functional motor outcomes, and somatosensory functions. Differences between both groups for the main outcome (WMFT time) were 51% (p = 0.04) at one month, and 57% (p = 0.02) at one year.

CONCLUSION

tDCS seems to be an effective adjuvant to conventional rehabilitation techniques. If applied in the acute stages of stroke, functional recovery is not only accelerated, but improved, and results are maintained up to one-year post stroke.

Evidence of chronic stroke rehabilitation interventions in activities and participation outcomes: systematic review of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disabilities worldwide. A great deal of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) address rehabilitation in chronic stroke, several of them with focus on activities and participation, considered critical outcomes of successful rehabilitation. Nevertheless, substantial heterogeneity might exist between studies, the reported associations may be causal, but they might also be flawed, as inherent study biases such as residual confounding and selective reporting of positive results may exaggerate the effect of interventions in chronic phase. Furthermore, most RCTs might focus on specific rehabilitation domains, not paying the same attention to others.

EVIDENCE ACQUSITION

Formal evaluation of published systematic reviews of meta-analyses (January 2008 to November 2018) of rehabilitation in chronic phase to 1) assess the strength of evidence: participants, publication biases, heterogeneity, prediction intervals (PIs) 2) grade the evidence to perform qualitative analysis on effects sizes and heterogeneity, 3) perform meta-regressions and sensitivity analysis on relevant covariates 4) map outcomes to activities and participation domain of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Systematic review on meta-analyses of RCTs addressing activities and participation will be performed in Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane and Google Scholar.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 97 meta-analyses on 31 different rehabilitation interventions involving 25,275 participants were included. Thirty-nine meta-analyses (40.74%) reported statistically significant findings (P<0.05) in both fixed and random effects sizes. Their magnitude was small in 62.96% cases, moderate in 19.75% and large in 17.28%. Heterogeneity was low in 48,48%, moderate and high in 21.2%. The mean number of participants is 815, far away from the convincing, highly suggestive, or suggestive required evidence levels. All PIs include the null value. Mobility is addressed by 87% of the identified meta-analyses, with 75% of them focusing exclusively in mobility.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study show a clear need for high quality RCTs examining the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions addressing activities and participation. The ICF framework may contribute to a holistic approach in chronic stroke rehabilitation, including not only motor functioning but also the ability to participate in everyday life activities.

Timing-dependent interaction effects of tDCS with mirror therapy on upper extremity motor recovery in patients with chronic stroke: A randomized controlled pilot study

This study was a randomized, controlled pilot trial to investigate the timing-dependent interaction effects of dual transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in mirror therapy (MT) for hemiplegic upper extremity in patients with chronic stroke. Thirty patients with chronic stroke were randomly assigned to three groups: tDCS applied before MT (prior-tDCS group), tDCS applied during MT (concurrent-tDCS group), and sham tDCS applied randomly prior to or concurrent with MT (sham-tDCS group). Dual tDCS at 1 mA was applied bilaterally over the ipsilesional M1 (anodal electrode) and the contralesional M1 (cathodal electrode) for 30 min. The intervention was delivered five days per week for two weeks. Upper extremity motor performance was measured using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and the Box and Block Test (BBT). Assessments were administered at baseline, post-intervention, and two weeks follow-up. The results indicated that concurrent-tDCS group showed significant improvements in the ARAT in relation to the prior-tDCS group and sham-tDCS group at post-intervention. Besides, a trend toward greater improvement was also found in the FMA-UE for the concurrent-tDCS group. However, no statistically significant difference in the FMA-UE and BBT was identified among the three groups at either post-intervention or follow-up. The concurrent-tDCS seems to be more advantageous and time-efficient in the context of clinical trials combining with MT. The timing-dependent interaction factor of tDCS to facilitate motor recovery should be considered in future clinical application.

Differential effects of left and right prefrontal cortex anodal transcranial direct current stimulation during probabilistic sequence learning

Left and right prefrontal cortex and the primary motor cortex (M1) are activated during learning of motor sequences. Previous literature is mixed on whether prefrontal cortex aids or interferes with sequence learning. The present study investigated the roles of prefrontal cortices and M1 in sequence learning. Participants received anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to right or left prefrontal cortex or left M1 during a probabilistic sequence learning task. Relative to sham, the left prefrontal cortex and M1 tDCS groups exhibited enhanced learning evidenced by shorter response times for pattern trials, but only for individuals who did not gain explicit awareness of the sequence (implicit). Right prefrontal cortex stimulation in participants who did not gain explicit sequence awareness resulted in learning disadvantages evidenced by slower overall response times for pattern trials. These findings indicate that stimulation to left prefrontal cortex or M1 can lead to sequence learning benefits under implicit conditions. In contrast, right prefrontal cortex tDCS had negative effects on sequence learning, with overall impaired reaction time for implicit learners. There was no effect of tDCS on accuracy, and thus our reaction time findings cannot be explained by a speed-accuracy tradeoff. Overall, our findings suggest complex and hemisphere-specific roles of left and right prefrontal cortices in sequence learning. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Prefrontal cortices are engaged in motor sequence learning, but the literature is mixed on whether the prefrontal cortices aid or interfere with learning. In the current study, we used anodal transcranial direct current stimulation to target left or right prefrontal cortex or left primary motor cortex while participants performed a probabilistic sequence learning task. We found that left prefrontal and motor cortex stimulation enhanced implicit learning whereas right prefrontal stimulation negatively impacted performance.

Different Brain Connectivity between Responders and Nonresponders to Dual-Mode Noninvasive Brain Stimulation over Bilateral Primary Motor Cortices in Stroke Patients

Noninvasive brain stimulation (NBS), such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), has been used in stroke patients with motor impairment. NBS can help recovery from brain damage by modulating cortical excitability. However, the efficacy of NBS varies among individuals. To obtain insights of responsiveness to the efficacy of NBS, we investigated characteristic changes of the motor network in responders and nonresponders of NBS over the primary motor cortex (M1). A total of 21 patients with subacute stroke (13 males, mean age 59.6 ± 11.5 years) received NBS in the same manner: 1 Hz rTMS on the contralesional M1 and anodal tDCS on the ipsilesional M1. Participants were classified into responders and nonresponders based on the functional improvement of the affected upper extremity after applying NBS. Twelve age-matched healthy controls (8 males, mean age 56.1 ± 14.3 years) were also recruited. Motor networks were constructed using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. M1 intrahemispheric connectivity, interhemispheric connectivity, and network efficiency were measured to investigate differences in network characteristics between groups. The motor network characteristics were found to differ between both groups. Specifically, M1 intrahemispheric connectivity in responders showed a noticeable imbalance between affected and unaffected hemispheres, which was markedly restored after NBS. The responders also showed greater interhemispheric connectivity and higher efficiency of the motor network than the nonresponders. These results may provide insight on patient-specific NBS treatment based on the brain network characteristics in neurorehabilitation of patients with stroke. This trial is registered with trial registration number NCT03390192.

Analysis of the Factors Related to the Effectiveness of Transcranial Current Stimulation in Upper Limb Motor Function Recovery after Stroke: a Systematic Review

Transcranial direct current stimulation is one of the non-invasive techniques whose main mechanism of action is based on its modulation of cortical excitability. The objective of this study is to analyze the variables (i.e, demographics, clinicals, stimulation parameters) that could influence into the responses during rehabilitation of the upper extremity in patients with stroke. Our systematic review has been performed by searching full-text articles published from January 2008 to December 2018 in Embase, Medline, PubMed and Cochrane Library databases. Studies with adult patients with ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke at any stage of evolution were included. We compared interventions with any type of transcranial direct current stimulation (anodal, cathodal or bihemispheric, also known as dual) regarding improvement of upper extremity motor function. We included 14 studies with 368 patients, of whom almost 89% have ischemic etiology and more than half are males. Most patients were considered subacute or chronic, while only two studies were selected with patients in the acute phase. Different methods of using transcranial direct current stimulation with several complementary therapies were identified, such as virtual reality, robot therapy, Occupational Therapy, Physiotherapy, Constraint Induced Movement Therapy or Peripheral Nerve Stimulation. In conclusion, there is not significant evidence due to heterogeneity of clinical data and therapies. Clinical studies with greater number of participants and protocols standardized could outline this assessment in future studies.

Clinical neurophysiology of stroke

Stroke constitutes the third most common cause of death and the leading cause of acquired neurologic handicap. During ischemic stroke, very early after the onset of the focal perfusion deficit, excitotoxicity triggers a number of events that can further contribute to tissue death. Such events include peri-infarct depolarizations and spreading depolarizations (SDs) within the ischemic penumbra. SDs spread slowly through continuous gray matter at a typical velocity of 2-5mm/min. SDs exacerbate neuronal injury through prolonged ionic breakdown and SD-related hypoperfusion (spreading ischemia). Scalp EEG alone is not yet sufficient to reliably diagnose SDs. Hyperexcitability occurs in parallel, both in the acute and chronic phases of stroke. Stroke is a common cause of new-onset epileptic seizures after middle age and is the leading cause of symptomatic epilepsy in adults. The last part of this chapter is dedicated to noninvasive neurophysiologic techniques that can be used to promote stroke rehabilitation. These techniques mainly include repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and tDCS. These approaches are based on the concept of interhemispheric rivalry and aim at modulating the imbalance of cortical activities between both hemispheres resulting from stroke.

Evaluating the Effectiveness and Safety of the Electroencephalogram-Based Brain-Machine Interface Rehabilitation System for Patients With Severe Hemiparetic Stroke: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (BEST-BRAIN Trial)

BACKGROUND

We developed a brain-machine interface (BMI) system for poststroke patients with severe hemiplegia to detect event-related desynchronization (ERD) on scalp electroencephalogram (EEG) and to operate a motor-driven hand orthosis combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation. ERD arises when the excitability of the ipsi-lesional sensorimotor cortex increases.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate our hypothesis that motor training using this BMI system could improve severe hemiparesis that is resistant to improvement by conventional rehabilitation. We, therefore, planned and implemented a randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intensive rehabilitation using the BMI system.

METHODS

We conducted a single blind, multicenter RCT and recruited chronic poststroke patients with severe hemiparesis more than 90 days after onset (N=40). Participants were randomly allocated to the BMI group (n=20) or the control group (n=20). Patients in the BMI group repeated 10-second motor attempts to operate EEG-BMI 40 min every day followed by 40 min of conventional occupational therapy. The interventions were repeated 10 times in 2 weeks. Control participants performed a simple motor imagery without servo-action of the orthosis, and electrostimulation was given for 10 seconds for 40 min, similar to the BMI intervention. Overall, 40 min of conventional occupational therapy was also given every day after the control intervention, which was also repeated 10 times in 2 weeks. Motor functions and electrophysiological phenotypes of the paretic hands were characterized before (baseline), immediately after (post), and 4 weeks after (follow-up) the intervention. Improvement in the upper extremity score of the Fugl-Meyer assessment between baseline and follow-up was the main outcome of this study.

RESULTS

Recruitment started in March 2017 and ended in July 2018. This trial is currently in the data correcting phase. This RCT is expected to be completed by October 31, 2018.

CONCLUSIONS

No widely accepted intervention has been established to improve finger function of chronic poststroke patients with severe hemiparesis. The results of this study will provide clinical data for regulatory approval and novel, important understanding of the role of sensory-motor feedback based on BMI to induce neural plasticity and motor recovery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000026372; https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi? recptno=R000030299 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/743zBJj3D).

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/12339.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Pediatric Motor Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically examine the safety and effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) interventions in pediatric motor disorders.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases were searched from inception to August 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

tDCS randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, conference proceedings, and dissertations in pediatric motor disorders were included. Two authors independently screened articles based on predefined inclusion criteria.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data related to participant demographics, intervention, and outcomes were extracted by 2 authors. Quality assessment was independently performed by 2 authors.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 23 studies involving a total of 391 participants were included. There was no difference in dropout rates between active (1 of 144) and sham (1 of 144) tDCS groups, risk difference 0.0, 95% confidence interval (-.05 to .04). Across studies, the most common adverse effects in the active group were tingling (17.2%), discomfort (8.02%), itching (6.79%), and skin redness (4%). Across 3 studies in children with cerebral palsy, tDCS significantly improved gait velocity (MD=.23; 95% confidence interval [0.13-0.34]; P<.0005), stride length (MD=0.10; 95% confidence interval [0.05-0.15]; P<.0005), and cadence (MD=15.7; 95% confidence interval [9.72-21.68]; P<.0005). Mixed effects were found on balance, upper extremity function, and overflow movements in dystonia.

CONCLUSION

Based on the studies reviewed, tDCS is a safe technique in pediatric motor disorders and may improve some gait measures and involuntary movements. Research to date in pediatric motor disorders shows limited effectiveness in improving balance and upper extremity function. tDCS may serve as a potential adjunct to pediatric rehabilitation; to better understand if tDCS is beneficial for pediatric motor disorders, more well-designed RCTs are needed.

Nonsurgical Treatment Options for Upper Limb Spasticity

There are many nonsurgical treatment options for patients with upper limb spasticity. This article presents an algorithmic approach to management, encompassing evidence-based rehabilitation therapies, medications, and promising new orthotic and robotic innovations.

Neurosurgical Management of Spastic Conditions of the Upper Extremity

Spasticity is a hypertonic segmental reflex pathway caused by a central nervous system injury. Spasticity of the upper extremity causes loss of function, joint contracture, pain, and poor cosmesis. Treatment aims to reduce or change the pathophysiology underlying the hyperactive reflex from dorsal sensory rootlets through the intrinsic machinery of the spinal cord to the neuromuscular junction. There are many treatments for upper extremity spasticity including oral medication, physiotherapy, intrathecal baclofen, and lesional or neuromodulatory surgical approaches. Goals of treatment must always be clearly defined, but neurosurgical management is most effective when paired with multidisciplinary therapies and caregiver participation.

The Effect of Unihemispheric Concurrent Dual-Site Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of Primary Motor and Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortices on Motor Function in Patients With Sub-Acute Stroke

It is believed that unihemispheric concurrent dual-site transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS_UHCDS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) causes an increase in motor cortex excitability. However, the clinical effect of this type of stimulation on patients with neurological conditions is not yet known. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of anodal-tDCS_UHCDS (a-tDCS_UHCDS) on upper limb motor function in subacute stroke patients. Fifteen patients participated in this sham-controlled crossover study. The main outcome measures were the reaction time (RT) to visual stimuli, completion time of a nine-pin pegboard (9-PPB), and the scores from the Fugl–Meyer assessment (FMA) for the upper limb of the involved side before and after three brain stimulation conditions. For a-tDCS_UHCDS, the anodal electrodes were placed on the M1 and the DLPFC, while for a-tDCS, the anodal electrode was placed on the M1. For the sham stimulation, the tDCS was turned off after 30 s. For brain stimulation, the selected current was 1 mA for 20 min. After a-tDCS_UHCDS, there was a significant reduction in the RT and completion time of the 9-PPB compared with the times after a-tDCS and the sham stimulation: p = 0.013 and p = 0.022, respectively). However, there was no significant difference in the FMA scores after the three types of stimulations (p = 0.085). Compared with a-tDCS, a-tDCS_UHCDS temporarily improved the RT and dexterity of the involved hand in subacute stroke patients.

Clinical Trial Registration: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT), identifier IRCT2015012520787N1.