脑肿瘤患者对重复经颅磁刺激术后康复的认知。

IF 2.4 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neuro-oncology practice Pub Date : 2024-09-25 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1093/nop/npae092
Ahmad M S Ali, Jahard Aliaga-Arias, Rasheed Zakaria, Michael D Jenkinson, Prajwal Ghimire, Ranjeev Bhangoo, Keyoumars Ashkan, Ana Mirallave-Pescador, Francesco Vergani, Jose Pedro Lavrador
{"title":"脑肿瘤患者对重复经颅磁刺激术后康复的认知。","authors":"Ahmad M S Ali, Jahard Aliaga-Arias, Rasheed Zakaria, Michael D Jenkinson, Prajwal Ghimire, Ranjeev Bhangoo, Keyoumars Ashkan, Ana Mirallave-Pescador, Francesco Vergani, Jose Pedro Lavrador","doi":"10.1093/nop/npae092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is established for depression and rehabilitation after stroke and is emerging for cognitive rehabilitation. We sought to evaluate patient and carer perceptions toward rTMS for rehabilitation after neurosurgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two surveys were undertaken. Group 1: Patients who received 7 days of rTMS for motor or language rehabilitation for severe postoperative deficits following lesional resection were prospectively surveyed on the last day of their rTMS treatment, as well as their next of kin. Group 2: Patients who had previously been diagnosed with glioma but did not receive rTMS were retrospectively surveyed through two brain tumor charities, including next of kin.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group 1: Twenty-one responses. Eleven patients, 10 next of kin. The commonest pathology was WHO Grade 4 glioma (<i>n</i> = 3). Group 2: 24 responses. Sixteen patients, 8 next of kin. The commonest pathology was WHO Grade 2 glioma (<i>n</i> = 7). Most Group 1 respondents reported a positive experience of rTMS (15/21). Patients experienced subjective improvements in gross motor functions of arm and leg weakness and purposeful movement (9/11). Lack of subjective motor improvement was associated with adverse symptoms (e.g., headaches; <i>p</i> = .01). Group 2 respondents were supportive of rTMS. Key priorities included motor and cognitive rehabilitation. They were accepting of longer and more frequent rTMS sessions than Group 1 (<i>p</i> = .028 and <.001, respectively). Commonest concerns pertained to side effects are seizures and headaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>rTMS for rehabilitation was well-tolerated by patients with side effects being commoner in those with no subjective motor improvements. Nontreated patients and their next of kin would find longer and more sessions acceptable but have concerns about potential side effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":19234,"journal":{"name":"Neuro-oncology practice","volume":"12 1","pages":"68-75"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11798612/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brain tumor patient perceptions toward repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for rehabilitation after surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmad M S Ali, Jahard Aliaga-Arias, Rasheed Zakaria, Michael D Jenkinson, Prajwal Ghimire, Ranjeev Bhangoo, Keyoumars Ashkan, Ana Mirallave-Pescador, Francesco Vergani, Jose Pedro Lavrador\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/nop/npae092\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is established for depression and rehabilitation after stroke and is emerging for cognitive rehabilitation. We sought to evaluate patient and carer perceptions toward rTMS for rehabilitation after neurosurgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two surveys were undertaken. Group 1: Patients who received 7 days of rTMS for motor or language rehabilitation for severe postoperative deficits following lesional resection were prospectively surveyed on the last day of their rTMS treatment, as well as their next of kin. Group 2: Patients who had previously been diagnosed with glioma but did not receive rTMS were retrospectively surveyed through two brain tumor charities, including next of kin.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group 1: Twenty-one responses. Eleven patients, 10 next of kin. The commonest pathology was WHO Grade 4 glioma (<i>n</i> = 3). Group 2: 24 responses. Sixteen patients, 8 next of kin. The commonest pathology was WHO Grade 2 glioma (<i>n</i> = 7). Most Group 1 respondents reported a positive experience of rTMS (15/21). Patients experienced subjective improvements in gross motor functions of arm and leg weakness and purposeful movement (9/11). Lack of subjective motor improvement was associated with adverse symptoms (e.g., headaches; <i>p</i> = .01). Group 2 respondents were supportive of rTMS. Key priorities included motor and cognitive rehabilitation. They were accepting of longer and more frequent rTMS sessions than Group 1 (<i>p</i> = .028 and <.001, respectively). Commonest concerns pertained to side effects are seizures and headaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>rTMS for rehabilitation was well-tolerated by patients with side effects being commoner in those with no subjective motor improvements. Nontreated patients and their next of kin would find longer and more sessions acceptable but have concerns about potential side effects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuro-oncology practice\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"68-75\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11798612/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuro-oncology practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/nop/npae092\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuro-oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/nop/npae092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:重复经颅磁刺激(rTMS)已被确立用于脑卒中后抑郁和康复,并在认知康复方面崭露头角。我们试图评估患者和护理人员对神经手术后rTMS康复的看法。方法:进行两次问卷调查。第1组:因病变切除后严重术后缺陷接受7天rTMS进行运动或语言康复的患者,在rTMS治疗的最后一天进行前瞻性调查,以及他们的近亲。第2组:通过两家脑肿瘤慈善机构对先前被诊断为胶质瘤但未接受rTMS的患者进行回顾性调查,包括其近亲。结果:第一组:21例。11个病人,10个近亲。最常见的病理是WHO 4级胶质瘤(n = 3)。第二组:24例。16个病人,8个近亲。最常见的病理是WHO 2级胶质瘤(n = 7)。大多数第一组受访者报告了rTMS的积极体验(15/21)。患者在手臂和腿部无力的大运动功能和有目的的运动方面经历了主观改善(9/11)。缺乏主观运动改善与不良症状(如头痛;p = 0.01)。第二组受访者支持rTMS。重点包括运动和认知康复。与第一组相比,他们接受的rTMS治疗时间更长,频率更高(p =。028和结论:rTMS用于康复的患者耐受性良好,副作用在没有主观运动改善的患者中更常见。未接受治疗的患者和他们的近亲可以接受更长时间和更长的疗程,但担心潜在的副作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Brain tumor patient perceptions toward repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for rehabilitation after surgery.

Background: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is established for depression and rehabilitation after stroke and is emerging for cognitive rehabilitation. We sought to evaluate patient and carer perceptions toward rTMS for rehabilitation after neurosurgery.

Methods: Two surveys were undertaken. Group 1: Patients who received 7 days of rTMS for motor or language rehabilitation for severe postoperative deficits following lesional resection were prospectively surveyed on the last day of their rTMS treatment, as well as their next of kin. Group 2: Patients who had previously been diagnosed with glioma but did not receive rTMS were retrospectively surveyed through two brain tumor charities, including next of kin.

Results: Group 1: Twenty-one responses. Eleven patients, 10 next of kin. The commonest pathology was WHO Grade 4 glioma (n = 3). Group 2: 24 responses. Sixteen patients, 8 next of kin. The commonest pathology was WHO Grade 2 glioma (n = 7). Most Group 1 respondents reported a positive experience of rTMS (15/21). Patients experienced subjective improvements in gross motor functions of arm and leg weakness and purposeful movement (9/11). Lack of subjective motor improvement was associated with adverse symptoms (e.g., headaches; p = .01). Group 2 respondents were supportive of rTMS. Key priorities included motor and cognitive rehabilitation. They were accepting of longer and more frequent rTMS sessions than Group 1 (p = .028 and <.001, respectively). Commonest concerns pertained to side effects are seizures and headaches.

Conclusions: rTMS for rehabilitation was well-tolerated by patients with side effects being commoner in those with no subjective motor improvements. Nontreated patients and their next of kin would find longer and more sessions acceptable but have concerns about potential side effects.

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
Neuro-oncology practice
Neuro-oncology practice CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
92
期刊介绍: Neuro-Oncology Practice focuses on the clinical aspects of the subspecialty for practicing clinicians and healthcare specialists from a variety of disciplines including physicians, nurses, physical/occupational therapists, neuropsychologists, and palliative care specialists, who have focused their careers on clinical patient care and who want to apply the latest treatment advances to their practice. These include: Applying new trial results to improve standards of patient care Translating scientific advances such as tumor molecular profiling and advanced imaging into clinical treatment decision making and personalized brain tumor therapies Raising awareness of basic, translational and clinical research in areas of symptom management, survivorship, neurocognitive function, end of life issues and caregiving
×
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