The Effectiveness of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation Alone or Combined with Cognitive Training on the Cognitive Performance of Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: Α Systematic Review.

Anastasia Nousia, Maria Martzoukou, Ioannis Liampas, Vasileios Siokas, Christos Bakirtzis, Grigorios Nasios, Efthimios Dardiotis
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation Alone or Combined with Cognitive Training on the Cognitive Performance of Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: Α Systematic Review.","authors":"Anastasia Nousia,&nbsp;Maria Martzoukou,&nbsp;Ioannis Liampas,&nbsp;Vasileios Siokas,&nbsp;Christos Bakirtzis,&nbsp;Grigorios Nasios,&nbsp;Efthimios Dardiotis","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acab047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The present study reviewed published evidence on the effectiveness of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on the cognitive performance of patients with Traumatic brain injury (TBI).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A systematic search of the PubMed and Google Scholar databases was carried out. Randomized Controlled Studies published before March 2020 were included. Methodological evaluation was performed based on the Risk of Bias Cochrane tool. A total of 10 placebo-controlled studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were involved in the qualitative analysis, two assessing NIBS combined with cognitive training (CT) and eight evaluating NIBS alone.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All but one retrieved article were appraised as of high-risk of bias (one paper was assessed as of unclear-risk owing to considerable underreporting). With the potential exception of attention, our findings were not indicative of a superior efficacy of NIBS-CT to CT alone, regarding the improvement of any of the rest assessed cognitive deficits. Executive function, processing speed, attention, working, and visuospatial memory were only occasionally found to benefit from NIBS alone compared to sham therapy (only one study reported relevant benefits per neuropsychological outcome). Verbal memory and verbal fluency (phonemic-semantic) were consistently found not to benefit from NIBS. Depression measures were the only outcomes associated with a beneficial effect of NIBS in more than one article.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings did not provide sufficient high-quality evidence to support the exclusive use of NIBS or combined NIBS-CT to improve any impaired cognitive function in TBI patients. Owing to the suboptimum methodological quality of published studies, additional research is of potential value.</p>","PeriodicalId":520564,"journal":{"name":"Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists","volume":" ","pages":"497-512"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acab047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objective: The present study reviewed published evidence on the effectiveness of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) on the cognitive performance of patients with Traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Method: A systematic search of the PubMed and Google Scholar databases was carried out. Randomized Controlled Studies published before March 2020 were included. Methodological evaluation was performed based on the Risk of Bias Cochrane tool. A total of 10 placebo-controlled studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were involved in the qualitative analysis, two assessing NIBS combined with cognitive training (CT) and eight evaluating NIBS alone.

Results: All but one retrieved article were appraised as of high-risk of bias (one paper was assessed as of unclear-risk owing to considerable underreporting). With the potential exception of attention, our findings were not indicative of a superior efficacy of NIBS-CT to CT alone, regarding the improvement of any of the rest assessed cognitive deficits. Executive function, processing speed, attention, working, and visuospatial memory were only occasionally found to benefit from NIBS alone compared to sham therapy (only one study reported relevant benefits per neuropsychological outcome). Verbal memory and verbal fluency (phonemic-semantic) were consistently found not to benefit from NIBS. Depression measures were the only outcomes associated with a beneficial effect of NIBS in more than one article.

Conclusion: Our findings did not provide sufficient high-quality evidence to support the exclusive use of NIBS or combined NIBS-CT to improve any impaired cognitive function in TBI patients. Owing to the suboptimum methodological quality of published studies, additional research is of potential value.

无创脑刺激单独或联合认知训练对创伤性脑损伤患者认知能力的影响:Α系统综述。
目的:本研究综述了非侵入性脑刺激(NIBS)对创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者认知能力的影响。方法:系统检索PubMed和Google Scholar数据库。纳入了2020年3月之前发表的随机对照研究。方法学评价采用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具。共有10项安慰剂对照研究符合纳入标准并参与定性分析,其中2项评估NIBS联合认知训练(CT), 8项单独评估NIBS。结果:除一篇外,所有检索到的文章均被评价为偏倚高风险(一篇由于大量少报而被评价为风险不明确)。除了注意力方面的潜在例外,我们的研究结果并不表明NIBS-CT比单独使用CT更能改善其他评估的认知缺陷。与假治疗相比,执行功能、处理速度、注意力、工作和视觉空间记忆只是偶尔发现单独使用NIBS有益(只有一项研究报告了每个神经心理学结果的相关益处)。言语记忆和言语流畅性(音素-语义)一直没有从NIBS中受益。在一篇以上的文章中,抑郁措施是唯一与NIBS有益效果相关的结果。结论:我们的研究结果没有提供足够的高质量证据来支持单独使用NIBS或NIBS- ct联合治疗来改善TBI患者的认知功能受损。由于已发表研究的方法学质量不佳,进一步的研究具有潜在价值。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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