Stephanie Pilotti, Lucas Denardi Dória, Maria Luisa Gasparini, Natália Garcia Dos Santos, Barbara Regina França, André Luiz Silveira Mallmann, André Lucas Ribeiro, Leonardo Peterson Dos Santos, Daniel Nóbrega de Moraes, Rafaela Cavalheiro do Espírito Santo, Claiton Viegas Brenol, Iraci L S Torres, Wolnei Caumo, Ricardo Machado Xavier
{"title":"Home-based transcranial direct current stimulation for persistent pain state in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized trial.","authors":"Stephanie Pilotti, Lucas Denardi Dória, Maria Luisa Gasparini, Natália Garcia Dos Santos, Barbara Regina França, André Luiz Silveira Mallmann, André Lucas Ribeiro, Leonardo Peterson Dos Santos, Daniel Nóbrega de Moraes, Rafaela Cavalheiro do Espírito Santo, Claiton Viegas Brenol, Iraci L S Torres, Wolnei Caumo, Ricardo Machado Xavier","doi":"10.1186/s42358-026-00535-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although effectively controlling inflammation, up to 50% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) experience persistent pain, associated with central sensitization and neuroinflammation. Home-based transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown efficacy in chronic pain.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate whether anodal tDCS (a-tDCS) is more effective than sham stimulation in reducing pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial with 34 women (18-70 years) with RA and VAS > 40 mm. Participants were randomized to receive a-tDCS (n = 17) or sham tDCS (n = 17). Home-based tDCS (2 mA, 20 min/day) or sham (2 mA, 90 s) for four weeks, using anodal-left M1 montage. Primary outcomes was pain (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS), Secondary outcomes included pressure pain threshold (PPT), central sensitization (CSI), physical function (HAQ-DI), fatigue (FACIT-F), CNS biomarkers, adherence, and safety.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean VAS reduction from baseline was greater in the a-tDCS group (-33.5 mm) versus s-tDCS (-14.1 mm), with a between-group difference of -19.4 mm (95% CI, -29.3 to -9.5; p = 0.003). Linear mixed-effects models showed that a-tDCS reduced VAS pain by 27.7% versus 6.0% with sham, a between-group difference of 21.7% (Cohen's d = 1.15). HAQ-DI improved by 38.0% versus 7.2% (ES = 1.10). a-tDCS reduced analgesic use by 62% (RR = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.79). Exploratory analyses suggested that neuroplasticity mechanisms might mediate these effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Home-based a-tDCS effectively reduced pain, disability, and analgesic use in RA patients with persistent pain without objective inflammation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48634,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Rheumatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13488835/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42358-026-00535-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Although effectively controlling inflammation, up to 50% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) experience persistent pain, associated with central sensitization and neuroinflammation. Home-based transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown efficacy in chronic pain.
Objective: To investigate whether anodal tDCS (a-tDCS) is more effective than sham stimulation in reducing pain.
Methods: Randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial with 34 women (18-70 years) with RA and VAS > 40 mm. Participants were randomized to receive a-tDCS (n = 17) or sham tDCS (n = 17). Home-based tDCS (2 mA, 20 min/day) or sham (2 mA, 90 s) for four weeks, using anodal-left M1 montage. Primary outcomes was pain (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS), Secondary outcomes included pressure pain threshold (PPT), central sensitization (CSI), physical function (HAQ-DI), fatigue (FACIT-F), CNS biomarkers, adherence, and safety.
Results: Mean VAS reduction from baseline was greater in the a-tDCS group (-33.5 mm) versus s-tDCS (-14.1 mm), with a between-group difference of -19.4 mm (95% CI, -29.3 to -9.5; p = 0.003). Linear mixed-effects models showed that a-tDCS reduced VAS pain by 27.7% versus 6.0% with sham, a between-group difference of 21.7% (Cohen's d = 1.15). HAQ-DI improved by 38.0% versus 7.2% (ES = 1.10). a-tDCS reduced analgesic use by 62% (RR = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.79). Exploratory analyses suggested that neuroplasticity mechanisms might mediate these effects.
Conclusion: Home-based a-tDCS effectively reduced pain, disability, and analgesic use in RA patients with persistent pain without objective inflammation.
期刊介绍:
Formerly named Revista Brasileira de Reumatologia, the journal is celebrating its 60th year of publication.
Advances in Rheumatology is an international, open access journal publishing pre-clinical, translational and clinical studies on all aspects of paediatric and adult rheumatic diseases, including degenerative, inflammatory and autoimmune conditions. The journal is the official publication of the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology and welcomes original research (including systematic reviews and meta-analyses), literature reviews, guidelines and letters arising from published material.