1
|
Lodewyk K, Bagnell A, MacMaster FP, Newton AS. Adverse event monitoring and reporting in pediatric neuromodulatory studies: A systematic review. J Psychiatr Res 2024; 175:359-367. [PMID: 38761518 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.05.035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2023] [Revised: 04/16/2024] [Accepted: 05/14/2024] [Indexed: 05/20/2024]
Abstract
Neuromodulatory interventions are relatively novel and approaches to studying harms and tolerability have varied. Using a checklist based on guidelines from Good Clinical Practice and the Harms Extension of the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement, we identified how adverse events are measured, assessed, and reported in studies evaluating neuromodulation for the treatment of mental and neurodevelopmental disorders among children and adolescents. A systematic literature review identified 56 experimental and quasi-experimental studies evaluating transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), transcranial alternating (tACS) or direct (tDCS) current stimulation, transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS), and vagus or trigeminal nerve stimulation (VNS or TNS). For 22 studies (39%), the types of adverse events to be monitored were identified, and for 31 studies (55%), methods for collecting adverse event data were described. Methods for assessing adverse events were less commonly described with 23 studies (41%) having details on assessing event severity, and 11 studies (20%) having details on assessing event causality. Among 31 studies with reported results, headache, skin irritation, and general pain or discomfort were the most reported across studies. Seizure, untoward medical occurrences, and intracranial bleeding, edema, or other intracranial pathology were considered serious events, but these events were not reported as occurring in any results-based papers. Taken together, the findings from this review indicate that most studies of pediatric neuromodulatory interventions did not include descriptions of adverse event monitoring and evaluation. Comprehensive event monitoring and reporting across studies can significantly augment the current knowledge base.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kalee Lodewyk
- University of Alberta, 3-526 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 11405 - 87 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1C9, Canada.
| | - Alexa Bagnell
- IWK Health, 5980 University Ave #5850, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3K 6R8, Canada.
| | - Frank P MacMaster
- IWK Health, 5980 University Ave #5850, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3K 6R8, Canada.
| | - Amanda S Newton
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, 3-526 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 11405 - 87 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 1C9, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Salehinejad MA, Siniatchkin M. Safety of noninvasive brain stimulation in children. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2024; 37:78-86. [PMID: 38226535 DOI: 10.1097/yco.0000000000000923] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/17/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) is a promising method for altering cortical excitability with clinical implications. It has been increasingly used in children, especially in neurodevelopmental disorders. Yet, its safety and applications in the developing brain require further investigation. This review aims to provide an overview of the safety of commonly used NIBS techniques in children, including transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Safety data for other NIBS methods is not reported in this review. RECENT FINDINGS In line with studies from the last decade, findings in the last 2 years (2022-2023) support the safety of NIBS in children and adolescents within the currently applied protocols. Both tES and TMS are well tolerated, if safety rules, including exclusion criteria, are applied. SUMMARY We briefly discussed developmental aspects of stimulation parameters that need to be considered in the developing brain and provided an up-to-date overview of tES/TMS applications in children and adolescents. Overall, the safety profile of tES/TMS in children is good. For both the tES and TMS applications, epilepsy and active seizure disorder should be exclusion criteria to prevent potential seizures. Using child-sized earplugs is required for TMS applications. We lack large randomized double-blind trialsand longitudinal studies to establish the safety of NIBS in children. VIDEO ABSTRACT http://links.lww.com/YCO/A78 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammad Ali Salehinejad
- Neuromdulation Group, Department of Psychology and Neurosciences, Leibniz-Institut für Arbeitsforschung an der TU Dortmund, Dortmund
| | - Michael Siniatchkin
- Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics, and Psychotherapy, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Guimarães RSQ, Bandeira ID, Barretto BL, Wanke T, Alves COC, Barretto TL, de Carvalho CF, Dorea-Bandeira I, Tolentino A, Lins-Silva DH, Lucena PH, Lucena R. Efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a randomized, triple-blinded, sham-controlled, crossover trial. Front Psychiatry 2024; 14:1217407. [PMID: 38268562 PMCID: PMC10806216 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1217407] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2023] [Accepted: 12/12/2023] [Indexed: 01/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction Although pharmacological treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has demonstrated efficacy, several individuals persist in experiencing social and academic impairment. Additionally, the occurrence of significant side effects may render the use of psychotropic medications untenable. However, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, shows promising results in treating ADHD. Objectives To investigate the efficacy and safety of tDCS on the performance of children and adolescents with ADHD in neuropsychological tests involving visual attention, visual and verbal working memory, and inhibitory control. Methodology This study was a triple-blind, randomized, sham-controlled, crossover clinical trial. The intervention consisted of a daily session of tDCS (2 mA) or sham targeting the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (L-DLPFC), for 30 min, on five consecutive days. The primary outcome was change in the Visual Attention Test, Fourth Edition (TAVIS-4) before and after each intervention. Subjects were also evaluated pre and post-tDCS using the Digit Span subtest of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition (WISC-V), the Developmental Neuropsychological Assessment, Second Edition (NEPSY-II) Inhibiting Response (IR) subtest, and the Corsi Block-Tapping Task. Results Fifteen individuals were included, and no statistically significant difference was observed when comparing the results of the TAVIS-4, the IR of NEPSY-II, and the intragroup Digit Span subtest of WISC-V undertaken before and after the procedure. Adverse events were mainly self-limiting and transient. The participants did not perceive any benefit from tDCS when measured on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) Scale. Conclusion This study did not meet its primary endpoint and found no performance enhancement in any investigated neuropsychological outcomes relating to the intervention group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Igor D. Bandeira
- Programa de Pós-Graduação em Medicina e Saúde, Faculdade de Medicina da Bahia, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Brazil
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States
| | | | - Thamires Wanke
- Instituto de Psicologia, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Brazil
| | | | | | | | | | - Arthur Tolentino
- Faculdade de Medicina da Bahia, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Brazil
| | | | - Pedro H. Lucena
- Escola Bahiana de Medicina e Saúde Pública, Salvador, Brazil
| | - Rita Lucena
- Departamento de Neurociências e Saúde Mental, Faculdade de Medicina da Bahia, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Buchanan DM, Amare S, Gaumond G, D'Angiulli A, Robaey P. Safety and Tolerability of tDCS across Different Ages, Sexes, Diagnoses, and Amperages: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Study. J Clin Med 2023; 12:4346. [PMID: 37445385 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12134346] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2023] [Revised: 06/23/2023] [Accepted: 06/24/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique with substantial evidence for its safety and tolerability in adults. However, less than 5% of published tDCS research is in pediatrics. Our primary objective was to investigate tDCS safety, tolerability, and acceptability in a sample of children and adults. We hypothesized that children and adults would be equal with regard to tDCS safety, tolerability, and acceptability. We tested this hypothesis using a Bayesian approach. Sixty participants aged 6-45 (balanced for sex) participated in a randomized double-blind controlled trial. They were randomly assigned to two ten-minute tDCS sessions with varying amperages and electrode locations. The primary outcome measure of this study was the intensity of 13 potential side effects evaluated at six different time points spanning two weeks. Independent sample Bayes factor tests were conducted between children/adults, males/females, clinical/healthy, and low/high amperage groups. As predicted, there was moderate support for the null hypothesis in all between-group analyses. There were no serious adverse events or dropouts, and the number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome was 23. This study provided evidence supporting the overall short-term safety, tolerability, and acceptability of tDCS including amperages up to 2 mA and different electrode placements.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Derrick M Buchanan
- Department of Neuroscience, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Neuroscience of Imagination Cognition Emotion Research Lab, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Neuropsychiatric Lab, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L1, Canada
| | - Sarah Amare
- Department of Neuroscience, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Neuroscience of Imagination Cognition Emotion Research Lab, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Neuropsychiatric Lab, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L1, Canada
| | - Genevieve Gaumond
- Department of Neuroscience, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Neuroscience of Imagination Cognition Emotion Research Lab, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Neuropsychiatric Lab, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L1, Canada
| | - Amedeo D'Angiulli
- Department of Neuroscience, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Neuroscience of Imagination Cognition Emotion Research Lab, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Philippe Robaey
- Department of Neuroscience, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Neuropsychiatric Lab, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L1, Canada
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gallop L, Westwood SJ, Lewis Y, Campbell IC, Schmidt U. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation in children and young people with psychiatric disorders: a systematic review. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2023:10.1007/s00787-023-02157-0. [PMID: 36764973 DOI: 10.1007/s00787-023-02157-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/04/2022] [Accepted: 01/26/2023] [Indexed: 02/12/2023]
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has demonstrated benefits in adults with various psychiatric disorders, but its clinical utility in children and young people (CYP) remains unclear. This PRISMA systematic review used published and ongoing studies to examine the effects of tDCS on disorder-specific symptoms, mood and neurocognition in CYP with psychiatric disorders. We searched Medline via PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO via OVID, and Clinicaltrials.gov up to December 2022. Eligible studies involved multiple session (i.e., treatment) tDCS in CYP (≤ 25 years old) with psychiatric disorders. Two independent raters assessed the eligibility of studies and extracted data using a custom-built form. Of 33 eligible studies (participant N = 517), the majority (n = 27) reported an improvement in at least one outcome measure of disorder-specific symptoms. Few studies (n = 13) examined tDCS effects on mood and/or neurocognition, but findings were mainly positive. Overall, tDCS was well tolerated with minimal side effects. Of 11 eligible ongoing studies, many are sham-controlled RCTs (n = 9) with better blinding techniques and a larger estimated participant enrolment (M = 79.7; range 15-172) than published studies. Although encouraging, the evidence to date is insufficient to firmly conclude that tDCS can improve clinical symptoms, mood, or cognition in CYP with psychiatric disorders. Ongoing studies appear of improved methodological quality; however, future studies should broaden outcome measures to more comprehensively assess the effects of tDCS and develop dosage guidance (i.e., treatment regimens).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy Gallop
- Section of Eating Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, PO Box 59, London, SE5 8AF, UK.
| | - Samuel J Westwood
- Department of Psychology, School of Social Science, University of Westminster, London, W1W 6UW, UK
- Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, SE5 8AB, UK
| | - Yael Lewis
- Section of Eating Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, PO Box 59, London, SE5 8AF, UK
- Hadarim Eating Disorder Unit, Shalvata Mental Health Centre, Hod Hasharon, Israel
- Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
| | - Iain C Campbell
- Section of Eating Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, PO Box 59, London, SE5 8AF, UK
| | - Ulrike Schmidt
- Section of Eating Disorders, Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, PO Box 59, London, SE5 8AF, UK
- South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|