Abstract
Background
Stroke is a leading cause of upper-extremity (UE) motor impairments worldwide. Transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) may enhance UE recovery, but response variability remains a challenge.
Objective
This randomized, double-blinded feasibility and pilot clinical trial evaluated effects of patient-tailored TDCS versus sham on UE recovery in subacute stroke.
Methods
Patients with subacute ischemic stroke and UE impairment were randomized to receive either anodal TDCS or sham stimulation, during UE rehabilitation 3 times weekly for 4 weeks. Electrode placement was patient-tailored and optimized using electric field modeling and targeted the ipsilesional primary motor hand area (M1-HAND). Primary outcome was Fugl-Meyer Assessment of UE (FMA-UE) score at end-of-intervention (EOT) and 12-weeks follow-up. Feasibility and exploratory clinical outcomes were also assessed.
Results
24 participants were randomized into real (n = 12, mean age 63 years) and sham TDCS (n = 12, mean age 68 years). FMA-UE improved at EOT in both groups, but improvement was significantly larger in the real TDCS group (mean difference 4.5 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) −5.34-14.31, P = .011). The differences diminished at 12-week follow-up. Median compliance was 95.8 and 100%, for real- and sham-TDCS groups, respectively, with no severe adverse events.
Conclusions
Patient-tailored anodal TDCS over the ipsilesional M1-HAND may boost recovery of UE impairment in subacute stroke versus sham TDCS. This trial identified a clinically feasible framework for optimizing protocols of patient-tailored TDCS for larger-scale stroke trials. Despite the complex trial setup, the favorable safety profile supports future large-scale studies with improved stratification by UE impairment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
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.
