The safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation and exercise therapy for the treatment of cervicogenic headaches: A randomized pilot trial.

IF 5.4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Headache Pub Date : 2025-01-17 DOI:10.1111/head.14887
Kaiden Jobin, Ashley Smith, Christina Campbell, Siobhan M Schabrun, Jean-Michel Galarneau, Kathryn J Schneider, Chantel T Debert
{"title":"The safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation and exercise therapy for the treatment of cervicogenic headaches: A randomized pilot trial.","authors":"Kaiden Jobin, Ashley Smith, Christina Campbell, Siobhan M Schabrun, Jean-Michel Galarneau, Kathryn J Schneider, Chantel T Debert","doi":"10.1111/head.14887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Our primary objective was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with exercise therapy for the treatment of cervicogenic headache. Our exploratory objectives compared symptoms of headache, mood, pain, and quality of life between active and sham transcranial direct stimulation combined with exercise therapy.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Cervicogenic headache arises from injury to the cervical spine or degenerative diseases impacting cervical spine structure resulting in pain, reduced quality of life, and impaired function. Current standard-of-care treatments such as radiofrequency ablation, pharmacotherapy, manual therapy, and exercise therapy lack efficacy for some patients. Transcranial direct current stimulation is a neuromodulation technique that has shown promise in treating chronic pain conditions by positively altering neuronal activity but has not been evaluated as treatment for cervicogenic headache.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This double-blind, sham-controlled, randomized, feasibility trial recruited 32 participants between the ages of 18 and 65 years that met the International Classification of Headache Disorders third edition criteria for cervicogenic headache. Participants were randomized to receive either active or sham transcranial direct current stimulation both combined with daily exercise therapy over 6 weeks. Transcranial direct current stimulation was applied over the primary motor cortex ipsilateral to worse pain for 20 min at 2 mA with a 30 s ramp up/down period. Recruitment, retention, and adherence were evaluated for feasibility. Safety was assessed through serious and minor adverse events and an adverse effect questionnaire. Clinical outcome measures assessed headache, pain, quality of life, and mood symptoms at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and 6- and 12-weeks post-treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 97 participants were contacted to participate with 32 recruited, 16 randomized into each group, and 14 completing the treatment protocol in both groups. Within each group 12 (active) and nine (sham) completed treatment within the proposed 6 weeks (three sessions per week), others received 18 sessions but took longer. Exercise therapy was completed on an average of 87% of days for both groups. Transcranial direct current stimulation was safe, with no serious adverse events and one minor adverse event in the active group. Itching was a more common post-intervention complaint in the active group (64% active vs. 43% sham). Exploratory analysis revealed significant group × time interactions for average headache pain from pre- to post-treatment (β = -1.012, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.751 to -0.273; p = 0.008), 6-weeks (β = -1.370, 95% CI -2.109 to -0.631; p < 0.001), and 12-weeks (β = -1.842, 95% CI -2.600 to -1.085; p < 0.001) post-treatment, and for neck pain from pre- to post-treatment (β = -1.184, 95% CI -2.076 to -0.292; p = 0.010) and 12-weeks (β = -1.029, 95% CI -1.944 to -0.114; p = 0.028) post-treatment favoring active vs. sham. There were no significant group × time interactions for quality of life or mood.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The combination of transcranial direct stimulation and exercise therapy is safe and feasible for treating cervicogenic headache. While some promise has been shown for reducing headache and neck pain, larger scale trials with adequate power are needed to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Headache","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/head.14887","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Our primary objective was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with exercise therapy for the treatment of cervicogenic headache. Our exploratory objectives compared symptoms of headache, mood, pain, and quality of life between active and sham transcranial direct stimulation combined with exercise therapy.

Background: Cervicogenic headache arises from injury to the cervical spine or degenerative diseases impacting cervical spine structure resulting in pain, reduced quality of life, and impaired function. Current standard-of-care treatments such as radiofrequency ablation, pharmacotherapy, manual therapy, and exercise therapy lack efficacy for some patients. Transcranial direct current stimulation is a neuromodulation technique that has shown promise in treating chronic pain conditions by positively altering neuronal activity but has not been evaluated as treatment for cervicogenic headache.

Methods: This double-blind, sham-controlled, randomized, feasibility trial recruited 32 participants between the ages of 18 and 65 years that met the International Classification of Headache Disorders third edition criteria for cervicogenic headache. Participants were randomized to receive either active or sham transcranial direct current stimulation both combined with daily exercise therapy over 6 weeks. Transcranial direct current stimulation was applied over the primary motor cortex ipsilateral to worse pain for 20 min at 2 mA with a 30 s ramp up/down period. Recruitment, retention, and adherence were evaluated for feasibility. Safety was assessed through serious and minor adverse events and an adverse effect questionnaire. Clinical outcome measures assessed headache, pain, quality of life, and mood symptoms at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and 6- and 12-weeks post-treatment.

Results: A total of 97 participants were contacted to participate with 32 recruited, 16 randomized into each group, and 14 completing the treatment protocol in both groups. Within each group 12 (active) and nine (sham) completed treatment within the proposed 6 weeks (three sessions per week), others received 18 sessions but took longer. Exercise therapy was completed on an average of 87% of days for both groups. Transcranial direct current stimulation was safe, with no serious adverse events and one minor adverse event in the active group. Itching was a more common post-intervention complaint in the active group (64% active vs. 43% sham). Exploratory analysis revealed significant group × time interactions for average headache pain from pre- to post-treatment (β = -1.012, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.751 to -0.273; p = 0.008), 6-weeks (β = -1.370, 95% CI -2.109 to -0.631; p < 0.001), and 12-weeks (β = -1.842, 95% CI -2.600 to -1.085; p < 0.001) post-treatment, and for neck pain from pre- to post-treatment (β = -1.184, 95% CI -2.076 to -0.292; p = 0.010) and 12-weeks (β = -1.029, 95% CI -1.944 to -0.114; p = 0.028) post-treatment favoring active vs. sham. There were no significant group × time interactions for quality of life or mood.

Conclusion: The combination of transcranial direct stimulation and exercise therapy is safe and feasible for treating cervicogenic headache. While some promise has been shown for reducing headache and neck pain, larger scale trials with adequate power are needed to confirm these findings.

经颅直流电刺激和运动疗法治疗颈源性头痛的安全性和可行性:一项随机试验。
目的:我们的主要目的是评估经颅直流电刺激联合运动疗法治疗颈源性头痛的安全性和可行性。我们的探索目的是比较主动和假经颅直接刺激联合运动疗法在头痛、情绪、疼痛和生活质量方面的症状。背景:颈源性头痛源于颈椎损伤或退行性疾病影响颈椎结构,导致疼痛、生活质量下降和功能受损。目前的标准治疗方法,如射频消融、药物治疗、手工治疗和运动治疗对一些患者缺乏疗效。经颅直流电刺激是一种神经调节技术,通过积极改变神经元活动来治疗慢性疼痛,但尚未被评估为治疗颈源性头痛。方法:这项双盲、假对照、随机、可行性试验招募了32名年龄在18至65岁之间、符合国际头痛疾病分类第三版颈源性头痛标准的参与者。参与者随机接受主动或假性经颅直流电刺激,并结合日常运动治疗,持续6周。经颅直流电刺激同侧初级运动皮层,使疼痛加重20分钟,电流为2 mA,上升/下降时间为30秒。对招募、保留和依从性进行可行性评估。通过严重和轻微不良事件以及不良反应问卷来评估安全性。临床结果评估治疗前、治疗后、治疗后6周和12周的头痛、疼痛、生活质量和情绪症状。结果:共联系97名参与者参与,其中32名被招募,16名随机分为两组,14名完成两组治疗方案。在每组中,12名(积极组)和9名(假组)在建议的6周内完成治疗(每周3次),其他组接受18次治疗,但花费的时间更长。两组患者的运动治疗平均完成时间为87%。经颅直流电刺激是安全的,活性组无严重不良事件,1例轻微不良事件。在主动组中,瘙痒是更常见的干预后抱怨(主动组64% vs假组43%)。探索性分析显示,治疗前和治疗后平均头痛的组×时间相互作用显著(β = -1.012, 95%可信区间[CI] -1.751 ~ -0.273;p = 0.008), 6周(β= -1.370,95%可信区间-2.109到-0.631;结论:经颅直接刺激联合运动疗法治疗颈源性头痛安全可行。虽然已经显示出减轻头痛和颈部疼痛的一些希望,但需要更大规模的试验来证实这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Headache
Headache 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
172
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Headache publishes original articles on all aspects of head and face pain including communications on clinical and basic research, diagnosis and management, epidemiology, genetics, and pathophysiology of primary and secondary headaches, cranial neuralgias, and pains referred to the head and face. Monthly issues feature case reports, short communications, review articles, letters to the editor, and news items regarding AHS plus medicolegal and socioeconomic aspects of head pain. This is the official journal of the American Headache Society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信