Automatic M1‐SO Montage Headgear for Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS) Suitable for Home and High‐Throughput In‐Clinic Applications

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Ameliorate Post-Stroke Cognitive Impairment

Post-stroke cognitive impairment is a common and disabling condition with few effective therapeutic options. After stroke, neural reorganization and other neuroplastic processes occur in response to ischemic injury, which can result in clinical improvement through spontaneous recovery. Neuromodulation through transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising intervention to augment underlying neuroplasticity in order to improve cognitive function. This form of neuromodulation leverages mechanisms of neuroplasticity post-stroke to optimize neural reorganization and improve function. In this review, we summarize the current state of cognitive neurorehabilitation post-stroke, the practical features of tDCS, its uses in stroke-related cognitive impairment across cognitive domains, and special considerations for the use of tDCS in the post-stroke patient population.

Investigating the neural mechanisms of transcranial direct current stimulation effects on human cognition: current issues and potential solutions

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been studied extensively for its potential to enhance human cognitive functions in healthy individuals and to treat cognitive impairment in various clinical populations. However, little is known about how tDCS modulates the neural networks supporting cognition and the complex interplay with mediating factors that may explain the frequently observed variability of stimulation effects within and between studies. Moreover, research in this field has been characterized by substantial methodological variability, frequent lack of rigorous experimental control and small sample sizes, thereby limiting the generalizability of findings and translational potential of tDCS. The present manuscript aims to delineate how these important issues can be addressed within a neuroimaging context, to reveal the neural underpinnings, predictors and mediators of tDCS-induced behavioral modulation. We will focus on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), because it allows the investigation of tDCS effects with excellent spatial precision and sufficient temporal resolution across the entire brain. Moreover, high resolution structural imaging data can be acquired for precise localization of stimulation effects, verification of electrode positions on the scalp and realistic current modeling based on individual head and brain anatomy. However, the general principles outlined in this review will also be applicable to other imaging modalities. Following an introduction to the overall state-of-the-art in this field, we will discuss in more detail the underlying causes of variability in previous tDCS studies. Moreover, we will elaborate on design considerations for tDCS-fMRI studies, optimization of tDCS and imaging protocols and how to assure high-level experimental control. Two additional sections address the pressing need for more systematic investigation of tDCS effects across the healthy human lifespan and implications for tDCS studies in age-associated disease, and potential benefits of establishing large-scale, multidisciplinary consortia for more coordinated tDCS research in the future. We hope that this review will contribute to more coordinated, methodologically sound, transparent and reproducible research in this field. Ultimately, our aim is to facilitate a better understanding of the underlying mechanisms by which tDCS modulates human cognitive functions and more effective and individually tailored translational and clinical applications of this technique in the future.

Electrode positioning errors reduce current dose for focal tDCS set-ups: Evidence from individualized electric field mapping

OBJECTIVE

Electrode positioning errors contribute to variability of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) effects. We investigated the impact of electrode positioning errors on current flow for tDCS set-ups with different focality.

METHODS

Deviations from planned electrode positions were determined using data acquired in an experimental study (N = 240 datasets) that administered conventional and focal tDCS during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Comparison of individualized electric field modeling for planned and empirically derived "actual" electrode positions was conducted to quantify the impact of positioning errors on the electric field dose in target regions for tDCS.

RESULTS

Planned electrode positions resulted in higher current dose in the target regions for focal compared to conventional montages (7-12%). Deviations from planned positions significantly reduced current flow in the target regions, selectively for focal set-ups (26-30%). Dose reductions were significantly larger for focal compared to conventional set-ups (29-43%).

CONCLUSIONS

Precise positioning is crucial when using focal tDCS set-ups to avoid significant reductions of current dose in the intended target regions.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our results highlight the urgent need to routinely implement methods for improving electrode positioning, minimization of electrode drift, verification of electrode positions before and/or after tDCS and also to consider positioning errors when investigating dose-response relationships, especially for focal set-ups.

Delivery of an at-home transcranial direct current stimulation intervention to mitigate pain in patients with end-stage kidney disease receiving hemodialysis (ESKD/HD)

Background

Poorly controlled pain remains a problem for many patients with end-stage kidney disease requiring hemodialysis (ESKD/HD) and customary approaches to pain management (e.g., opioids, non-steroidals) confer substantial risk. Accordingly, non-pharmacologic therapies are needed for use in this population. Non-invasive transcranial Direct Current Simulation (tDCS) constitutes a promising nonpharmacologic method for pain management in affected individuals.

Aims

This study seeks to: 1) determine the effects of an 8-week course of at-home tDCS vs. sham tDCS on pain intensity, pain interference, medication usage, quality of life, and mood; 2) determine if tDCS effects vary by race/ethnicity; and 3) ascertain patient satisfaction with device use.

Methods

This double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial will enroll 100 ESKD/HD patients with moderate-to-severe (≥4 on 0-10 scale) chronic pain. The active study intervention consists of 20 min of tDCS delivered over the primary motor cortex 5 days/week for 8 weeks. The comparator is a sham procedure that provides no effective stimulation. The primary outcome analysis will evaluate efficacy of tDCS for pain reduction after two months of stimulation. We will also assess the effects of treatment on analgesic consumption, pain interference, depressed mood, and quality of life. The statistical plan will include fixed classification factors for treatment (vs. sham), clinic sites, and assessment time, and the interaction of these factors adjusting for covariates (e.g., race/ethnicity, pain level).

Conclusion

At-home tDCS constitutes a promising nonpharmacologic treatment for pain mitigation in persons with ESKD/HD. This unique RCT could transform the way pain is managed in this vulnerable population.

Trial Registration

NCT05311956.

Feasibility, Acceptability, and Efficacy of Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Pain in Older Adults with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias: A Randomized Sham-Controlled Pilot Clinical Trial

Although transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is emerging as a convenient pain relief modality for several chronic pain conditions, its feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy on pain in patients with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) have not been investigated. The purpose of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of 5, 20-min home-based tDCS sessions on chronic pain in older adults with ADRD. We randomly assigned 40 participants to active (n = 20) or sham (n = 20) tDCS. Clinical pain intensity was assessed using a numeric rating scale (NRS) with patients and a proxy measure (MOBID-2) with caregivers. We observed significant reductions of pain intensity for patients in the active tDCS group as reflected by both pain measures (NRS: Cohen's d = 0.69, p-value = 0.02); MOBID-2: Cohen's d = 1.12, p-value = 0.001). Moreover, we found home-based tDCS was feasible and acceptable intervention approach for pain in ADRD. These findings suggest the need for large-scale randomized controlled studies with larger samples and extended versions of tDCS to relieve chronic pain on the long-term for individuals with ADRD.

Robust enhancement of motor sequence learning with 4 mA transcranial electric stimulation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Motor learning experiments with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) at 2 mA have produced mixed results. We hypothesize that tDCS boosts motor learning provided sufficiently high field intensity on the motor cortex.

METHODS

In a single-blinded design, 108 healthy participants received either anodal (N = 36) or cathodal (N = 36) tDCS at 4 mA total, or no stimulation (N = 36) while they practiced a 12-min sequence learning task. Anodal stimulation was delivered across four electrode pairs (1 mA each), with anodes above the right parietal lobe and cathodes above the right frontal lobe. Cathodal stimulation, with reversed polarities, served as an active control for sensation, while the no-stimulation condition established baseline performance. fMRI-localized targets on the primary motor cortex in 10 subjects were used in current flow models to optimize electrode placement for maximal field intensity. A single electrode montage was then selected for all participants.

RESULTS

We found a significant difference in performance with anodal vs. cathodal stimulation (Cohen's d = 0.71) and vs. no stimulation (d = 0.56). This effect persisted for at least 1 h, and subsequent learning for a new sequence and the opposite hand also improved. Sensation ratings were comparable in the active groups and did not exceed moderate levels. Current flow models suggest the new electrode montage can achieve stronger motor cortex polarization than alternative montages.

CONCLUSION

The present paradigm shows a medium to large effect size and is well-tolerated. It may serve as a go-to experiment for future studies on motor learning and tDCS.

Transcranial direct current stimulation leads to faster acquisition of motor skills, but effects are not maintained at retention

Practice is required to improve one’s shooting technique in basketball or to play a musical instrument well. Learning these motor skills may be further enhanced by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). We aimed to investigate whether tDCS leads to faster attainment of a motor skill, and to confirm prior work showing it improves skill acquisition and retention performance. Fifty-two participants were tested; half received tDCS with the anode on primary motor cortex and cathode on the contralateral forehead while concurrently practicing a sequential visuomotor isometric pinch force task on Day 1, while the other half received sham tDCS during practice. On Day 2, retention of the skill was tested. Results from a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that participants in the anodal group attained a pre-defined target level of skill faster than participants in the sham group (χ2 = 9.117, p = 0.003). Results from a nonparametric rank-based regression analysis showed that the rate of improvement was greater in the anodal versus sham group during skill acquisition (F(1,249) = 5.90, p = 0.016), but there was no main effect of group or time. There was no main effect of group or time, or group by time interaction when comparing performance at the end of acquisition to retention. These findings suggest anodal tDCS improves performance more quickly during skill acquisition but does not have additional benefits on motor learning after a period of rest.

Comparing amplitudes of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to the sensorimotor cortex during swallowing

PURPOSE

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can alter cortical excitability, making it a useful tool for promoting neuroplasticity in dysphagia rehabilitation. Clinical trials show functional improvements in swallowing following anodal tDCS despite varying dosing parameters and outcomes. The aim of the current study was to determine the most effective amplitude criterion (e.g., 0 mA [sham/control], 1 mA, 2 mA) of anodal tDCS for upregulating the swallowing sensorimotor cortex.

METHOD

As a novel paradigm, tDCS, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), and surface electromyography (sEMG) were simultaneously administered while participants completed a swallowing task. This allowed for measurement of the cortical hemodynamic response and submental muscle contraction before, during, and after tDCS. At the conclusion of the study, participants were asked to rate their level of discomfort associated with tDCS using a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the hemodynamic response by time or amplitude. However, post-hoc analyses indicated that in the post-stimulation period, changes to the hemodynamic response in the left (stimulated) hemisphere were significantly different for the groups receiving 1 mA and 2 mA of tDCS compared to baseline. Participants receiving 1 mA of tDCS demonstrated reduced hemodynamic response. There was no significant difference in submental muscle contraction during or after tDCS regardless of amplitude. Anodal tDCS was well tolerated in healthy adults with no difference among participant discomfort scores across tDCS amplitude.

CONCLUSIONS

During a swallowing task, healthy volunteers receiving 1 mA of anodal tDCS demonstrated a suppressed hemodynamic response during and after stimulation whereas those receiving 2 mA of anodal tDCS had an increase in the hemodynamic response. tDCS remains a promising tool in dysphagia rehabilitation, but dosing parameters require further clarification.

The Concept, Development, and Application of a Home-Based High-Definition tDCS for Bilateral Motor Cortex Modulation in Migraine and Pain

Whereas, many debilitating chronic pain disorders are dominantly bilateral (e.g., fibromyalgia, chronic migraine), non-invasive and invasive cortical neuromodulation therapies predominantly apply unilateral stimulation. The development of excitatory stimulation targeting bilateral primary motor (M1) cortices could potentially expand its therapeutic effect to more global pain relief. However, this is hampered by increased procedural and technical complexity. For example, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and 4 × 1/2 × 2 high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (4 × 1/2 × 2 HD-tDCS) are largely center-based, with unilateral-target focus-bilateral excitation would require two rTMS/4 × 1 HD-tDCS systems. We developed a system that allows for focal, non-invasive, self-applied, and simultaneous bilateral excitatory M1 stimulation, supporting long-term home-based treatment with a well-tolerated wearable battery-powered device. Here, we overviewed the most employed M1 neuromodulation methods, from invasive techniques to non-invasive TMS and tDCS. The evaluation extended from non-invasive diffuse asymmetric bilateral (M1-supraorbital [SO] tDCS), non-invasive and invasive unilateral focal (4 × 1/2 × 2 HD-tDCS, rTMS, MCS), to non-invasive and invasive bilateral bipolar (M1-M1 tDCS, MCS), before outlining our proposal for a neuromodulatory system with unique features. Computational models were applied to compare brain current flow for current laboratory-based unilateral M11 and bilateral M12 HD-tDCS models with a functional home-based M11-2 HD-tDCS prototype. We concluded the study by discussing the promising concept of bilateral excitatory M1 stimulation for more global pain relief, which is also non-invasive, focal, and home-based.

Universal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Headset for targeting the bilateral Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex: Towards facilitating broader adoption

Electrode position affects the brain current flow intensity and distribution induced by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). The dorsolateral pre-frontal cortex (DLPFC) is a common target in neuropsychology and neuropsychiatry applications. A positioning scheme and subsequently a headgear has previously been developed to target the DLPFC automatically - devoid of any scalp ruler or neuronavigation method. This approach minimizes the time cost for pre-treatment measurements without compromising targeting accuracy and induced electric field focality. The goal of this study was to further develop this headgear to facilitate broader adoption while maintaining its core design elements intact. Briefly, we developed the headset to accommodate all adult head sizes (52-62 cm) rather than having multiple sizes, to have increased robustness, enhanced visual aesthetics, and have improved usability.We recruited 8 subjects and tested the accuracy of electrode placement on various head sizes. We also tested usability with the System Usability Scale (SUS) and asked the subjects to rate visual appeal. Our study demonstrated that the newly developed headset had greater usability and was more visually appealing than its predecessor without compromising targeting accuracy.Clinical Relevance- This study introduces a headset for routine tDCS administration targeting bilateral DLPFC. The headset is highly usable, robust, and is expected to facilitate home and high-volume use.

Neurostimulation for cognitive enhancement in Alzheimer's disease (the NICE-AD study): a randomized clinical trial

New therapies for symptoms in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are urgently needed. Prior studies suggest that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a noninvasive neuromodulatory method, may be a safe and potentially effective treatment, but conclusions have been limited by small-sample sizes and brief stimulation protocols. This double-blind randomized trial involving 100 older adults with mild-to-moderate AD examines effects of 6 months of at-home active tDCS or sham delivered over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. The primary outcome is global cognitive performance. Secondary outcomes include executive-control/spatial selective attention, functional neuroplasticity, depressive symptoms, quality of life and the durability of effects 3 months after the stimulation period. The results will provide evidence on the efficacy of multimonth at-home tDCS in the AD treatment. =Clinical trial identifier NCT04404153 (Clinicaltrials.gov).

Applications of Non-invasive Neuromodulation for the Management of Disorders Related to COVID-19

Background: Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) morbidity is not restricted to the respiratory system, but also affects the nervous system. Non-invasive neuromodulation may be useful in the treatment of the disorders associated with COVID-19. Objective: To describe the rationale and empirical basis of the use of non-invasive neuromodulation in the management of patients with COVID-10 and related disorders. Methods: We summarize COVID-19 pathophysiology with emphasis of direct neuroinvasiveness, neuroimmune response and inflammation, autonomic balance and neurological, musculoskeletal and neuropsychiatric sequela. This supports the development of a framework for advancing applications of non-invasive neuromodulation in the management COVID-19 and related disorders. Results: Non-invasive neuromodulation may manage disorders associated with COVID-19 through four pathways: (1) Direct infection mitigation through the stimulation of regions involved in the regulation of systemic anti-inflammatory responses and/or autonomic responses and prevention of neuroinflammation and recovery of respiration; (2) Amelioration of COVID-19 symptoms of musculoskeletal pain and systemic fatigue; (3) Augmenting cognitive and physical rehabilitation following critical illness; and (4) Treating outbreak-related mental distress including neurological and psychiatric disorders exacerbated by surrounding psychosocial stressors related to COVID-19. The selection of the appropriate techniques will depend on the identified target treatment pathway. Conclusion: COVID-19 infection results in a myriad of acute and chronic symptoms, both directly associated with respiratory distress (e.g., rehabilitation) or of yet-to-be-determined etiology (e.g., fatigue). Non-invasive neuromodulation is a toolbox of techniques that based on targeted pathways and empirical evidence (largely in non-COVID-19 patients) can be investigated in the management of patients with COVID-19.

Novel flexible cap for application of transcranial electrical stimulation: a usability study

Background

Advances in transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) are hampered by the conventional rubber electrodes manually attached to the head with rubber bands. This procedure limits montages to a few electrodes, is error prone with respect to electrode configurations and is burdensome for participants and operators. A newly developed flexible cap with integrated textile stimulation electrodes was compared to the conventional setup of rubber electrodes inserted into sponges fixated by rubber bands, with respect to usability and reliability. Two operators applied both setups to 20 healthy volunteers participating in the study. Electrode position and impedance measures as well as subjective evaluations from participants and operators were obtained throughout the stimulation sessions.

Results

Our results demonstrated the superiority of the flexible cap by means of significantly higher electrode configuration reproducibility and a more efficient application. Both, operators and volunteers evaluated the flexible cap as easier to use and more comfortable to wear when compared to the conventional setup.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the new cap improves existing and opens new application scenarios for tES.

Supervised transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) at home: A guide for clinical research and practice

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a method of noninvasive neuromodulation and potential therapeutic tool to improve functioning and relieve symptoms across a range of central and peripheral nervous system conditions. Evidence suggests that the effects of tDCS are cumulative with consecutive daily applications needed to achieve clinically meaningful effects. Therefore, there is growing interest in delivering tDCS away from the clinic or research facility, usually at home.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive guide to operationalize safe and responsible use of tDCS in home settings for both investigative and clinical use.

METHODS

Providing treatment at home can improve access and compliance by decreasing the burden of time and travel for patients and their caregivers, as well as to reach those in remote locations and/or living with more advanced disabilities.

RESULTS

To date, methodological approaches for at-home tDCS delivery have varied. After implementing the first basic guidelines for at-home tDCS in clinical trials, this work describes a comprehensive guide for facilitating safe and responsible use of tDCS in home settings enabling access for repeated administration over time.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide a reference and standard for practice when employing the use of tDCS outside of the clinic setting.

Enhanced tES and tDCS computational models by meninges emulation

OBJECTIVE

Understanding how current reaches the brain during transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) underpins efforts to rationalize outcomes and optimize interventions. To this end, computational models of current flow relate applied dose to brain electric field. Conventional tES modeling considers distinct tissues like scalp, skull, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), gray matter and white matter. The properties of highly conductive CSF are especially important. However, modeling the space between skull and brain as entirely CSF is not an accurate representation of anatomy. The space conventionally modeled as CSF is approximately half meninges (dura, arachnoid, and pia) with lower conductivity. However, the resolution required to describe individual meningeal layers is computationally restrictive in an MRI-derived head model. Emulating the effect of meninges through CSF conductivity modification could improve accuracy with minimal cost.

APPROACH

Models with meningeal layers were developed in a concentric sphere head model. Then, in a model with only CSF between skull and brain, CSF conductivity was optimized to emulate the effect of meningeal layers on cortical electric field for multiple electrode positions. This emulated conductivity was applied to MRI-derived models.

MAIN RESULTS

Compared to a model with conventional CSF conductivity (1.65 S m-1), emulated CSF conductivity (0.85 S m-1) produced voltage fields better correlated with intracranial recordings from epilepsy patients.

SIGNIFICANCE

Conventional tES models have been validated using intracranial recording. Residual errors may nonetheless impact model utility. Because CSF is so conductive to current flow, misrepresentation of the skull-brain interface as entirely CSF is not realistic for tES modeling. Updating the conventional model with a CSF conductivity emulating the effect of the meninges enhances modeling accuracy without increasing model complexity. This allows existing modeling pipelines to be leveraged with a simple conductivity change. Using 0.85 S m-1 emulated CSF conductivity is recommended as the new standard in non-invasive brain stimulation modeling.

Adaptive current tDCS up to 4 mA

BACKGROUND

Higher tDCS current may putatively enhance efficacy, with tolerability the perceived limiting factor.

OBJECTIVE

We designed and validated electrodes and an adaptive controller to provide tDCS up to 4 mA, while managing tolerability. The adaptive 4 mA controller included incremental ramp up, impedance-based current limits, and a Relax-mode where current is transiently decreased. Relax-mode was automatically activated by self-report VAS-pain score >5 and in some conditions by a Relax-button available to participants.

METHODS

In a parallel-group participant-blind design with 50 healthy subjects, we used specialized electrodes to administer 3 daily session of tDCS for 11 min, with a lexical decision task as a distractor, in 5 study conditions: adaptive 4 mA, adaptive 4 mA with Relax-button, adaptive 4 mA with historical-Relax-button, 2 mA, and sham. A tablet-based stimulator with a participant interface regularly queried VAS pain score and also limited current based on impedance and tolerability. An Abort-button provided in all conditions stopped stimulation. In the adaptive 4 mA with Relax-button and adaptive 4 mA with historical-Relax-button conditions, participants could trigger a Relax-mode ad libitum, in the latter case with incrementally longer current reductions. Primary outcome was the average current delivered during each session, VAS pain score, and adverse event questionnaires. Current delivered was analyzed either excluding or including dropouts who activated Abort (scored as 0 current).

RESULTS

There were two dropouts each in the adaptive 4 mA and sham conditions. Resistance based current attenuation was rarely activated, with few automatic VAS pain score triggered relax-modes. In conditions with Relax-button option, there were significant activations often irrespective of VAS pain score. Including dropouts, current across conditions were significantly different from each other with maximum current delivered during adaptive 4 mA with Relax-button. Excluding dropouts, maximum current was delivered with adaptive 4 mA. VAS pain score and adverse events for the sham was only significantly lower than the adaptive 4 mA with Relax-button and adaptive 4 mA with historical-Relax-button. There was no difference in VAS pain score or adverse events between 2 mA and adaptive 4 mA.

CONCLUSIONS

Provided specific electrodes and controllers, adaptive 4 mA tDCS is tolerated and effectively blinded, with acceptability likely higher in a clinical population and absence of regular querying. Indeed, presenting participants with overt controls increases rumination on sensation.

Dry tDCS: Tolerability of a novel multilayer hydrogel composite non-adhesive electrode for transcranial direct current stimulation

BACKGROUND

The adoption of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) is encouraged by portability and ease-of-use. However, the preparation of tDCS electrodes remains the most cumbersome and error-prone step. Here, we validate the performance of the first "dry" electrodes for tDCS. A "dry electrode" excludes 1) any saline or other electrolytes, that are prone to spread and leaving a residue; 2) any adhesive at the skin interface; or 3) any electrode preparation steps except the connection to the stimulator. The Multilayer Hydrogel Composite (MHC) dry-electrode design satisfied these criteria.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

Over an exposed scalp (supraorbital (SO) regions of forehead), we validated the performance of the first "dry" electrode for tDCS against the state-of-the-art conventional wet sponge-electrode to test the hypothesis that whether tDCS can be applied with a dry electrode with comparable tolerability as conventional "wet" techniques?

METHODS

MHC dry-electrode performance was verified using a skin-phantom, including mapping voltage at the phantom surface and mapping current inside the electrode using a novel biocompatible flexible printed circuit board current sensor matrix (fPCB-CSM). MHC dry-electrode performance was validated in a human trial including tolerability (VAS and adverse events), skin redness (erythema), and electrode current mapping with the fPCB-CSM. Experimental data from skin-phantom stimulation were compared against a finite element method (FEM) model.

RESULTS

Under the tested conditions (1.5 mA and 2 mA tDCS for 20 min using MHC-dry and sponge-electrode), the tolerability was improved, and the erythema and adverse-events were comparable between the MHC dry-electrode and the state-of-the-art sponge electrodes.

CONCLUSION

Dry (residue-free, non-spreading, non-adhesive, and no-preparation-needed) electrodes can be tolerated under the tested tDCS conditions, and possibly more broadly used in non-invasive electrical stimulation.