Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025-6
The impact of the number of sessions and stimulation parameters on repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation efficacy for post-stroke upper extremity recovery: A systematic review and meta-analysis
To identify the optimal number of sessions and parameters of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation frequency, stimulation intensity, number of pulses per session/treatment that promotes a greater effect on post-stroke upper extremity function.
Data sources
MEDLINE (PubMed), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature, Scientific Electronic Library Online, and Scopus up to November 2024.
Review methods
We conducted a meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with other therapies for post-stroke upper extremity function, assessed risk-of-bias using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale, calculated standard mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and determined parameter cutoff points using a receiver operating characteristic curve.
Results
Thirty-five randomized clinical trials involving 897 patients were included. Compared to control groups, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with other therapies improved upper extremity motor function with a higher effect size for: ≥ 15 sessions (SMD 0.72 95% CI, 0.37 to 1.08; p < 0.0001]), > 1 Hz frequencies (0.98 [95% CI, 0.48 to 1.48; p = 0001]), intensities of <100% of resting motor threshold (SMD 0.52 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.75; p < 0.00001]), ≥ 1000 pulses per session (SMD 0.61 [95% CI, 0.40 to 0.82; p < 0.00001]), and ≥12,000 pulses per treatment (SMD 0.64 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.93; p < 0.0001]).
Conclusion
To enhance post-stroke upper extremity function, the optimal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocol involves at least 15 sessions, frequencies above 1 Hz, intensities below 100% of resting motor threshold, at least 1000 pulses per session, and 12,000 pulses per treatment.
TsaoCWAdayAWAlmarzooqZI, et al.Heart disease and stroke statistics-2023 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation2023; 147: e93–e621.
2.
PollockAFarmerSEBradyMC, et al.Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2014; 11: CD010820.
3.
FeiginVLBraininMNorrvingB, et al.World stroke organization (WSO): global stroke fact sheet 2022. Int J Stroke2022; 17: 18–29.
4.
Nogueira NG deHMParmaJOLeãoSdA, et al.Mirror therapy in upper limb motor recovery and activities of daily living, and its neural correlates in stroke individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain Res Bull2021; 177: 217–238.
5.
MillerAAllenRJJumaAA, et al.Does repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation improve cognitive function in age-related neurodegenerative diseases? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2023; 38: e5974.
6.
ZhangLXingGFanY, et al.Short- and long-term effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper limb motor function after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil2017; 31: 1137–1153.
7.
DengZ-DLisanbySHPeterchevAV. Electric field depth–focality tradeoff in transcranial magnetic stimulation: simulation comparison of 50 coil designs. Brain Stimul2013; 6: 1–13.
8.
McDonaldWMDurkalskiVBallER, et al.Improving the antidepressant efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation: maximizing the number of stimulations and treatment location in treatment-resistant depression. Depress Anxiety2011; 28: 973–980.
9.
LindenbergRRengaVZhuLL, et al.Bihemispheric brain stimulation facilitates motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. Neurology2010; 75: 2176–2184.
10.
WatanabeKKudoYSugawaraE, et al.Comparative study of ipsilesional and contralesional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulations for acute infarction. J Neurol Sci2018; 384: 10–14.
11.
ChenQShenDSunH, et al.Effects of coupling inhibitory and facilitatory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor recovery in patients following acute cerebral infarction. NeuroRehabilitation2021; 48: 83–96.
12.
LefaucheurJ-PAlemanABaekenC, et al.Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): an update (2014–2018). Clin Neurophysiol2020; 131: 474–528.
13.
ZhangLXingGShuaiS, et al.Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for stroke-induced upper limb motor deficit: a meta-analysis. Neural Plast2017; 2017: 2758097.
14.
KindredJHWonsetlerECCharalambousCC, et al.Individualized responses to ipsilesional high-frequency and contralesional low-frequency rTMS in chronic stroke: a pilot study to support the individualization of neuromodulation for rehabilitation. Front Hum Neurosci2020; 14: 578127.
15.
JannatiAObermanLMRotenbergA, et al.Assessing the mechanisms of brain plasticity by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neuropsychopharmacology2023; 48: 191–208.
16.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg2010; 8: 336–341.
17.
HigginsJPT. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Second edition. Chichester, Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2008
18.
PageSJFulkGDBoyneP. Clinically important differences for the upper-extremity fugl-Meyer scale in people with minimal to moderate impairment due to chronic stroke. Phys Ther2012; 92: 791–798.
19.
ChenH-MChenCCHsuehI-P, et al.Test-retest reproducibility and smallest real difference of 5 hand function tests in patients with stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2009; 23: 435–440.
20.
MorrisDMUswatteGCragoJE, et al.The reliability of the wolf motor function test for assessing upper extremity function after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2001; 82: 750–755.
21.
MiyamotoSKondoTSuzukamoY, et al.Reliability and validity of the manual function test in patients with stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2009; 88: 247–255.
22.
KohC-LHsuehI-PWangW-C, et al.Validation of the action research arm test using item response theory in patients after stroke. J Rehabil Med2006; 38: 375–380.
23.
BernhardtJHaywardKSKwakkelG, et al.Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: the stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable taskforce. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2017; 31: 793–799.
24.
MaherCGSherringtonCHerbertRD, et al.Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys Ther2003; 83: 713–721.
25.
FoleyNCTeasellRWBhogalSK, et al.Stroke rehabilitation evidence-based review: methodology. Top Stroke Rehabil2003; 10: 1–7.
26.
HigginsJPTThomasJChandlerJ, et al.Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 2019.
CohenJ. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Routledge, 2013.
29.
DeeksJJHigginsJPTAltmanDG, et al.Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions2019: 241–284.
30.
RückerGSchwarzerGCarpenterJR, et al.Undue reliance on I(2) in assessing heterogeneity may mislead. BMC Med Res Methodol2008; 8: 79.
31.
AşkınATosunADemirdalÜS. Effects of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper extremity motor recovery and functional outcomes in chronic stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Somatosens Mot Res2017; 34: 102–107.
32.
GalvãoSCBdos SantosRBCdos SantosPB, et al.Efficacy of coupling repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and physical therapy to reduce upper-limb spasticity in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2014; 95: 222–229.
33.
HigginsJKoskiLXieH. Combining rTMS and task-oriented training in the rehabilitation of the arm after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Stroke Res Treat2013; 2013: 1–8.
34.
JiS-GKimM-KChaH-G. Effects of mental practice in conjunction with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on the upper limbs of sub-acute stroke patients. J Magn2014; 19: 353–356.
35.
KuzuÖAdiguzelEKesikburunS, et al.The effect of sham controlled continuous theta burst stimulation and low frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper extremity spasticity and functional recovery in chronic ischemic stroke patients. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis2021; 30: 105795.
36.
MaS-RJeonM-CYangB-I, et al.Effect of 1 hz low frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on cerebral activity and recovery on upper limb motor function in chronic stroke patients. J Magn2019; 24: 758–762.
37.
MalcolmMPTriggsWJLightKE, et al.Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as an adjunct to constraint-induced therapy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2007; 86: 707–715.
38.
ChaHGKimMK. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on arm function and decreasing unilateral spatial neglect in subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2016; 30: 649–656.
39.
DuJWangSChengY, et al.Effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper limb motor function rehabilitation in stroke patients with hemiplegia. Comput Math Methods Med2022; 2022: 9455428.
40.
OzkeskinMOzturkVCakmurR, et al.The effects of navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic simulation and brunnstrom movement therapy on upper extremity proprioceptive sense and spasticity in stroke patients: a double-blind randomized trial. J Basic Clin Health Sci2017; 1: 29–35.
41.
ChaHG. The effect of 1 hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with task-oriented training on upper limb function and hemineglect in stroke patients. J Magn2017; 22: 514–518.
42.
HosomiKMorrisSSakamotoT, et al.Daily repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for poststroke upper limb paresis in the subacute period. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis2016; 25: 1655–1664.
43.
LiJDuY-FMengX-M, et al.Effects of different frequencies of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on the recovery of upper limb motor dysfunction in patients with subacute cerebral infarction. Neural Regen Res2016; 11: 1584.
44.
LongHWangHZhaoC, et al.Effects of combining high- and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on upper limb hemiparesis in the early phase of stroke. Restor Neurol Neurosci2018; 36: 21–30.
45.
LukKYOuyangHXPangMYC. Low-frequency rTMS over contralesional M1 increases ipsilesional cortical excitability and motor function with decreased interhemispheric asymmetry in subacute stroke: a randomized controlled study. Neural Plast2022; 2022: 1–13.
46.
Lüdemann-PodubeckáJBöslKNowakDA. Inhibition of the contralesional dorsal premotor cortex improves motor function of the affected hand following stroke. Eur J Neurol2016; 23: 823–830.
47.
KimW-SKwonBSSeoHG, et al.Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over contralesional motor Cortex for motor recovery in subacute ischemic stroke: a randomized sham-controlled trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2020; 34: 856–867.
48.
PomeroyVMCloudGTallisRC, et al.Transcranial magnetic stimulation and muscle contraction to enhance stroke recovery: a randomized proof-of-principle and feasibility investigation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2007; 21: 509–517.
49.
SeniówJBilikMLeśniakM, et al.Transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with physiotherapy in rehabilitation of poststroke hemiparesis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2012; 26: 1072–1079.
50.
XuDCaoHFanY, et al.Comparative analysis of the effect of low-frequency repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation and extracorporeal shock wave on improving the spasm of flexor after stroke. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med2021; 2021: 7769581.
51.
YangYPanHPanW, et al.Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on the affected hemisphere enhances hand functional recovery in subacute adult stroke patients: A randomized trial. Front Aging Neurosci2021; 13: 636184.
52.
WuXWangRWuQ, et al.The effects of combined high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and cervical nerve root magnetic stimulation on upper extremity motor recovery following stroke. Front Neurosci2023; 17: 1100464.
53.
WangLZhuQ-XZhongM-H, et al.Effects of corticospinal tract integrity on upper limb motor function recovery in stroke patients treated with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. J Integr Neurosci2022; 21: 50.
54.
ZhengC-JLiaoW-JXiaW-G. Effect of combined low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and virtual reality training on upper limb function in subacute stroke: a double-blind randomized controlled trail. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technol2015; 35: 248–254.
55.
DuJYangFHuJ, et al.Effects of high- and low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor recovery in early stroke patients: evidence from a randomized controlled trial with clinical, neurophysiological and functional imaging assessments. Neuroimage Clin2019; 21: 101620.
56.
GuanY-ZLiJZhangX-W, et al.Effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) after acute stroke: a one-year longitudinal randomized trial. CNS Neurosci Ther2017; 23: 940–946.
57.
DuJTianLLiuW, et al.Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor recovery and motor cortex excitability in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Neurol2016; 23: 1666–1672.
58.
SharmaHVishnuVYKumarN, et al.Efficacy of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in ischemic stroke: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl2020; 2: 100039.
59.
LiangSWangWYuF, et al.Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation combined with transcranial magnetic stimulation in rehabilitation of upper extremity hemiparesis following stroke: a pilot study. J Rehabil Med2024; 56: jrm19449.
60.
TheiligSPodubeckaJBöslK, et al.Functional neuromuscular stimulation to improve severe hand dysfunction after stroke: does inhibitory rTMS enhance therapeutic efficiency?Exp Neurol2011; 230: 149–155.
61.
HarveyRLEdwardsDDunningK, et al.Randomized sham-controlled trial of navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for motor recovery in stroke. Stroke2018; 49: 2138–2146.
62.
Motamed VaziriPBahrpeymaFFiroozabadiM, et al.Low frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to improve motor function and grip force of upper limbs of patients with hemiplegia. Iran Red Crescent Med J2014; 16: e13579.
63.
KimM-K. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with task oriented training to improve upper extremity function after stroke. J Magn2014; 19: 170–173.
64.
ÖzkeskinMÖztürkVCakmurR, et al.Navigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation or Brunnstrom hand manipulation: which treatment is more effective in stroke cases?J Neurol Sci Turk2016; 33: 361–372. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx? direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=13001817&AN=114933234&h=wyBvqsE3BL1wh0ctFmeDChsiIS1xitn1A1lF8SOjGS2e4RhNk%2BwLcZkkuVt3EdhkuGlp6EPTEFZvaWA4A9WoGA%3D%3D&
65.
Maertens de NoordhoutA. General principles for clinical use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Neurophysiol Clin2006; 36: 97–103.
66.
Di PinoGPellegrinoGAssenzaG, et al.Modulation of brain plasticity in stroke: a novel model for neurorehabilitation. Nat Rev Neurol2014; 10: 597–608.
67.
LvYZhangJJWangK, et al.Determining the optimal stimulation sessions for TMS-induced recovery of upper extremity motor function post stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Brain Sci2023; 13: 1662.
68.
SalatinoABerraETroniW, et al.Behavioral and neuroplastic effects of low-frequency rTMS of the unaffected hemisphere in a chronic stroke patient: a concomitant TMS and fMRI study. Neurocase2014; 20: 615–626.
69.
LindenbergRZhuLLSchlaugG. Combined central and peripheral stimulation to facilitate motor recovery after stroke: the effect of number of sessions on outcome. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2012; 26: 479–483.
70.
BrownJCDeVriesWHKorteJE, et al.NMDA Receptor partial agonist, d-cycloserine, enhances 10 hz rTMS-induced motor plasticity, suggesting long-term potentiation (LTP) as underlying mechanism. Brain Stimul2020; 13: 530–532.
71.
BaurDGalevskaDHussainS, et al.Induction of LTD-like corticospinal plasticity by low-frequency rTMS depends on pre-stimulus phase of sensorimotor μ-rhythm. Brain Stimul2020; 13: 1580–1587.
72.
NowakDAGrefkesCAmeliM, et al.Interhemispheric competition after stroke: brain stimulation to enhance recovery of function of the affected hand. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2009; 23: 641–656.
73.
HummelFCCohenLG. Non-invasive brain stimulation: a new strategy to improve neurorehabilitation after stroke?Lancet Neurol2006; 5: 708–712.
74.
TangADBennettWBindoffAD, et al.Subthreshold repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation drives structural synaptic plasticity in the young and aged motor cortex. Brain Stimul2021; 14: 1498–1507.
75.
MorettiJRodgerJ. A little goes a long way: neurobiological effects of low intensity rTMS and implications for mechanisms of rTMS. Curr Res Neurobiol2022; 3: 100033.
76.
RossiSAntalABestmannS, et al.Safety and recommendations for TMS use in healthy subjects and patient populations, with updates on training, ethical and regulatory issues: expert guidelines. Clin Neurophysiol2021; 132: 269–306.
77.
DayanECensorNBuchER, et al.Noninvasive brain stimulation: from physiology to network dynamics and back. Nat Neurosci2013; 16: 838–844.
78.
SchulzeLFefferKLozanoC, et al.Number of pulses or number of sessions? An open-label study of trajectories of improvement for once-vs. Twice-daily dorsomedial prefrontal rTMS in major depression. Brain Stimul2018; 11: 327–336.
79.
MaHLinJHeJ, et al.Effectiveness of TES and rTMS for the treatment of insomnia: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomized sham-controlled trials. Front Psychiatry2021; 12: 744475.
80.
Dell’ossoBCamuriGCastellanoF, et al.Meta-Review of metanalytic studies with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for the treatment of Major depression. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health2011; 7: 167–177.
81.
JiangYGuoZMcClureMA, et al.Effect of rTMS on Parkinson’s cognitive function: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Neurol2020; 20: 377.
82.
ZhangJJQFongKNKOuyangR-G, et al.Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on craving and substance consumption in patients with substance dependence: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Addiction2019; 114: 2137–2149.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
