单侧和双侧顶叶经颅直流电刺激对右半脑卒中忽视症状患者的疗效:一项原理证明研究。

Anna Gorsler, Ulrike Grittner, Torsten Rackoll, Nadine Külzow
{"title":"单侧和双侧顶叶经颅直流电刺激对右半脑卒中忽视症状患者的疗效:一项原理证明研究。","authors":"Anna Gorsler,&nbsp;Ulrike Grittner,&nbsp;Torsten Rackoll,&nbsp;Nadine Külzow","doi":"10.12786/bn.2022.15.e19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Different transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) protocols have been tested to improve visuospatial neglect (VSN). So far, methodological heterogenity limits reliable conclusions about optimal stimualtion set-up. With this proof-of-principle study behavioral effects of two promising (uni- vs. bilateral) stimulation protocols were directly compared to gain more data for an appropriate tDCS protocol in subacute neglect patients. Notably, each tDCS set-up was combined with an identical sham condition to improve comparability. In a double-blind sham-controlled cross-over study 11 subacute post-stroke neglect patients received 20 minutes or 30 seconds (sham) tDCS (2 mA, 0.8 A/m<sup>2</sup>) parallel to neglect therapy randomized in unilateral (anode-reference: P4-Fp2 10-20 electroencephalography [EEG] system) and bilateral manner (anode-cathode: P4-P3) and 48h wash-out in-between. Before and immediately after stimulation performance were measured in cancellation task (bell test), and line bisection (deviation error). Significant difference between active and assigned sham condition was found in line bisection but not cancellation task. Particularly, deviation error was reduced after bilateral tDCS (hedges g<sup>*</sup> = 0.6) compared to bilateral sham, no such advantage were obtained for unilateral stimulation (hedges g<sup>*</sup> = 0.2). Using a direct comparison approach findings add further evidence that stimulating both hemispheres (bilateral) is superior in alleviating VSN symptoms than unilateral stimulation in subacute neglect.</p>","PeriodicalId":72442,"journal":{"name":"Brain & NeuroRehabilitation","volume":"15 2","pages":"e19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7a/d1/bn-15-e19.PMC9833469.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Unilateral and Bilateral Parietal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Right Hemispheric Stroke Patients With Neglect Symptoms: A Proof-of-Principle Study.\",\"authors\":\"Anna Gorsler,&nbsp;Ulrike Grittner,&nbsp;Torsten Rackoll,&nbsp;Nadine Külzow\",\"doi\":\"10.12786/bn.2022.15.e19\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Different transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) protocols have been tested to improve visuospatial neglect (VSN). So far, methodological heterogenity limits reliable conclusions about optimal stimualtion set-up. With this proof-of-principle study behavioral effects of two promising (uni- vs. bilateral) stimulation protocols were directly compared to gain more data for an appropriate tDCS protocol in subacute neglect patients. Notably, each tDCS set-up was combined with an identical sham condition to improve comparability. In a double-blind sham-controlled cross-over study 11 subacute post-stroke neglect patients received 20 minutes or 30 seconds (sham) tDCS (2 mA, 0.8 A/m<sup>2</sup>) parallel to neglect therapy randomized in unilateral (anode-reference: P4-Fp2 10-20 electroencephalography [EEG] system) and bilateral manner (anode-cathode: P4-P3) and 48h wash-out in-between. Before and immediately after stimulation performance were measured in cancellation task (bell test), and line bisection (deviation error). Significant difference between active and assigned sham condition was found in line bisection but not cancellation task. Particularly, deviation error was reduced after bilateral tDCS (hedges g<sup>*</sup> = 0.6) compared to bilateral sham, no such advantage were obtained for unilateral stimulation (hedges g<sup>*</sup> = 0.2). Using a direct comparison approach findings add further evidence that stimulating both hemispheres (bilateral) is superior in alleviating VSN symptoms than unilateral stimulation in subacute neglect.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brain & NeuroRehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"15 2\",\"pages\":\"e19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7a/d1/bn-15-e19.PMC9833469.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brain & NeuroRehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12786/bn.2022.15.e19\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain & NeuroRehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12786/bn.2022.15.e19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

不同的经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)方案已被测试改善视觉空间忽视(VSN)。到目前为止,方法的异质性限制了关于最佳刺激设置的可靠结论。在这项原理验证研究中,我们直接比较了两种有前景的刺激方案(单侧与双侧)的行为效果,以获得更多的数据,为亚急性忽视患者提供合适的tDCS方案。值得注意的是,每个tDCS设置都与相同的假条件相结合,以提高可比性。在一项双盲假对照交叉研究中,11例亚急性卒中后忽视患者接受20分钟或30秒(假)tDCS (2 mA, 0.8 a /m2)平行忽视治疗,随机分为单侧(阳极参照:P4-Fp2 10-20脑电图[EEG]系统)和双侧方式(阳极-阴极:P4-P3),中间48小时冲洗。在刺激前和刺激后立即测量抵消任务(钟形试验)和线平分(偏差误差)的性能。主动条件与指定条件在对线任务上有显著性差异,而在取消任务上无显著性差异。特别是,与双侧假手术相比,双侧tDCS(对冲系数g* = 0.6)后的偏差误差减少,而单侧刺激(对冲系数g* = 0.2)没有这种优势。采用直接比较方法,研究结果进一步证明,在亚急性忽视时,刺激双脑半球(双侧)比单侧刺激更能减轻VSN症状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Efficacy of Unilateral and Bilateral Parietal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Right Hemispheric Stroke Patients With Neglect Symptoms: A Proof-of-Principle Study.

Efficacy of Unilateral and Bilateral Parietal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Right Hemispheric Stroke Patients With Neglect Symptoms: A Proof-of-Principle Study.

Efficacy of Unilateral and Bilateral Parietal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Right Hemispheric Stroke Patients With Neglect Symptoms: A Proof-of-Principle Study.

Efficacy of Unilateral and Bilateral Parietal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Right Hemispheric Stroke Patients With Neglect Symptoms: A Proof-of-Principle Study.

Different transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) protocols have been tested to improve visuospatial neglect (VSN). So far, methodological heterogenity limits reliable conclusions about optimal stimualtion set-up. With this proof-of-principle study behavioral effects of two promising (uni- vs. bilateral) stimulation protocols were directly compared to gain more data for an appropriate tDCS protocol in subacute neglect patients. Notably, each tDCS set-up was combined with an identical sham condition to improve comparability. In a double-blind sham-controlled cross-over study 11 subacute post-stroke neglect patients received 20 minutes or 30 seconds (sham) tDCS (2 mA, 0.8 A/m2) parallel to neglect therapy randomized in unilateral (anode-reference: P4-Fp2 10-20 electroencephalography [EEG] system) and bilateral manner (anode-cathode: P4-P3) and 48h wash-out in-between. Before and immediately after stimulation performance were measured in cancellation task (bell test), and line bisection (deviation error). Significant difference between active and assigned sham condition was found in line bisection but not cancellation task. Particularly, deviation error was reduced after bilateral tDCS (hedges g* = 0.6) compared to bilateral sham, no such advantage were obtained for unilateral stimulation (hedges g* = 0.2). Using a direct comparison approach findings add further evidence that stimulating both hemispheres (bilateral) is superior in alleviating VSN symptoms than unilateral stimulation in subacute neglect.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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