Melissa D Stockbridge, Jordan Elm, Abeba A Teklehaimanot, Christy Cassarly, Leigh-Ann Spell, Julius Fridriksson, Argye E Hillis
{"title":"Individual Differences in Response to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation With Language Therapy in Subacute Stroke.","authors":"Melissa D Stockbridge, Jordan Elm, Abeba A Teklehaimanot, Christy Cassarly, Leigh-Ann Spell, Julius Fridriksson, Argye E Hillis","doi":"10.1177/15459683231190642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can be used to improve post-stroke aphasia. However, given the mixed evidence for its efficacy, individual differences may moderate the relative benefit of this strategy. In planned exploratory subgroup analyses, we examined whether age, education, sex, brain-derived neurotrophic factor status, and baseline performance individually impacted improvement in picture naming between baseline and 1 week after the end of the therapy, then whether the combination of factors that predicted recovery of naming and discourse differed for those who received concurrent tDCS.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Examine whether individual differences influenced the effect of tDCS on language recovery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, efficacy study of tDCS combined with language therapy for subacute post-stroke aphasia, patients completed an evaluation including the Philadelphia Naming Test and <i>Cookie Theft</i> picture description, which was analyzed for Content Units (CU) and Syllables/CU. Individual factors were examined using linear models including the interaction between treatment group and subgroup.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant interactions were observed between tDCS group and both age and education. The predictors of a positive response to tDCS differed from the predictors of a positive response to language treatment alone. While baseline performance was an important predictor of future performance regardless of treatment group, responses to treatment without tDCS were influenced by age whereas responses to treatment with tDCS were not.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Age and education influence the efficacy of different treatment strategies. Refinement of treatment selection is important to the overall individualization and optimization of post-stroke patient care.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02674490.</p>","PeriodicalId":56104,"journal":{"name":"Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair","volume":"37 8","pages":"519-529"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10528733/pdf/nihms-1916919.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683231190642","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can be used to improve post-stroke aphasia. However, given the mixed evidence for its efficacy, individual differences may moderate the relative benefit of this strategy. In planned exploratory subgroup analyses, we examined whether age, education, sex, brain-derived neurotrophic factor status, and baseline performance individually impacted improvement in picture naming between baseline and 1 week after the end of the therapy, then whether the combination of factors that predicted recovery of naming and discourse differed for those who received concurrent tDCS.
Objective: Examine whether individual differences influenced the effect of tDCS on language recovery.
Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, efficacy study of tDCS combined with language therapy for subacute post-stroke aphasia, patients completed an evaluation including the Philadelphia Naming Test and Cookie Theft picture description, which was analyzed for Content Units (CU) and Syllables/CU. Individual factors were examined using linear models including the interaction between treatment group and subgroup.
Results: Significant interactions were observed between tDCS group and both age and education. The predictors of a positive response to tDCS differed from the predictors of a positive response to language treatment alone. While baseline performance was an important predictor of future performance regardless of treatment group, responses to treatment without tDCS were influenced by age whereas responses to treatment with tDCS were not.
Conclusions: Age and education influence the efficacy of different treatment strategies. Refinement of treatment selection is important to the overall individualization and optimization of post-stroke patient care.
期刊介绍：
Neurorehabilitation & Neural Repair (NNR) offers innovative and reliable reports relevant to functional recovery from neural injury and long term neurologic care. The journal''s unique focus is evidence-based basic and clinical practice and research. NNR deals with the management and fundamental mechanisms of functional recovery from conditions such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer''s disease, brain and spinal cord injuries, and peripheral nerve injuries.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
