经颅电刺激(tES)治疗慢性疼痛患者:对日常报告症状的影响

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Antonio Gil-Ugidos, Jorge Alcántara-Espinosa, Lara Rubal-Otero, Mónica Mayo-Moldes, Noelia Samartin-Veiga, María Teresa Carrillo-de-la-Peña
{"title":"经颅电刺激(tES)治疗慢性疼痛患者:对日常报告症状的影响","authors":"Antonio Gil-Ugidos, Jorge Alcántara-Espinosa, Lara Rubal-Otero, Mónica Mayo-Moldes, Noelia Samartin-Veiga, María Teresa Carrillo-de-la-Peña","doi":"10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transcranial electrical stimulation has yielded positive results for relieving pain in patients with chronic pain (CP), but the existing evidence is insufficient. In order to address some gaps in the literature, we conducted a randomized, double blind, sham-controlled clinical trial aimed at evaluating the feasibility and efficacy of home-based neurostimulation in a sample of 120 patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The patients completed 15 self-administered home-based sessions of either transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS, n = 48), transcranial alternate current stimulation (tACS, n = 48), or sham stimulation (n = 24). The primary outcome variable, i.e., pain intensity, and related variables were assessed online (using numerical rating scales from 0 to 10) throughout 45 days (pre-treatment, treatment, and post-treatment periods each of 15 days).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ANOVA (classical and Bayesian frameworks) and time series analysis consistently showed that both tDCS and tACS decreased the patients' daily reported pain intensity (tDCS: tau = -0.553; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.563; p < 0.001), pain unpleasantness (tDCS: tau = -0.489; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.537; p < 0.001), interference due to pain (tDCS: tau = -0.368; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.424; p < 0.001), and other symptoms such as fatigue (tDCS: tau = -0.255; p = 0.02; tACS: tau = -0.556; p < 0.001) and stress/anxiety (tDCS: tau = -0.245; p = 0.02; tACS: tau = -0.685; p < 0.001). No such improvement was observed in the group receiving the sham stimulation. The home-based treatment was associated with low drop-out rates (6.66%) and moderate satisfaction with the procedure (around 5 out of 10 in all groups), and minimal adverse effects of transcranial electrical stimulation were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>tDCS and tACS significantly reduced daily-reported pain in chronic pain patients. Home-based intervention could significantly reduce the high economic burden associated with chronic pain management in healthcare systems. Inclusion of daily reports assessed by time series analysis can improve clinical trials in the field of chronic pain.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov ID number: NCT05099406 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05099406?term=NCT05099406%20&rank=1).</p>","PeriodicalId":48762,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"101613"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) in chronic pain patients: effects on daily-reported symptoms.\",\"authors\":\"Antonio Gil-Ugidos, Jorge Alcántara-Espinosa, Lara Rubal-Otero, Mónica Mayo-Moldes, Noelia Samartin-Veiga, María Teresa Carrillo-de-la-Peña\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101613\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transcranial electrical stimulation has yielded positive results for relieving pain in patients with chronic pain (CP), but the existing evidence is insufficient. In order to address some gaps in the literature, we conducted a randomized, double blind, sham-controlled clinical trial aimed at evaluating the feasibility and efficacy of home-based neurostimulation in a sample of 120 patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The patients completed 15 self-administered home-based sessions of either transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS, n = 48), transcranial alternate current stimulation (tACS, n = 48), or sham stimulation (n = 24). The primary outcome variable, i.e., pain intensity, and related variables were assessed online (using numerical rating scales from 0 to 10) throughout 45 days (pre-treatment, treatment, and post-treatment periods each of 15 days).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ANOVA (classical and Bayesian frameworks) and time series analysis consistently showed that both tDCS and tACS decreased the patients' daily reported pain intensity (tDCS: tau = -0.553; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.563; p < 0.001), pain unpleasantness (tDCS: tau = -0.489; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.537; p < 0.001), interference due to pain (tDCS: tau = -0.368; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.424; p < 0.001), and other symptoms such as fatigue (tDCS: tau = -0.255; p = 0.02; tACS: tau = -0.556; p < 0.001) and stress/anxiety (tDCS: tau = -0.245; p = 0.02; tACS: tau = -0.685; p < 0.001). No such improvement was observed in the group receiving the sham stimulation. The home-based treatment was associated with low drop-out rates (6.66%) and moderate satisfaction with the procedure (around 5 out of 10 in all groups), and minimal adverse effects of transcranial electrical stimulation were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>tDCS and tACS significantly reduced daily-reported pain in chronic pain patients. Home-based intervention could significantly reduce the high economic burden associated with chronic pain management in healthcare systems. Inclusion of daily reports assessed by time series analysis can improve clinical trials in the field of chronic pain.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov ID number: NCT05099406 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05099406?term=NCT05099406%20&rank=1).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48762,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"101613\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101613\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101613","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:经颅电刺激在缓解慢性疼痛(CP)患者疼痛方面取得了积极的效果,但现有证据不足。为了解决文献中的一些空白,我们进行了一项随机、双盲、假对照的临床试验,旨在评估120名患者的家庭神经刺激的可行性和有效性。方法:患者完成15个自我给药的基于家庭的经颅直流电刺激(tDCS, n = 48)、经颅交流电刺激(tACS, n = 48)或假刺激(n = 24)。主要结局变量,即疼痛强度和相关变量在45天内(治疗前、治疗和治疗后各15天)在线评估(使用从0到10的数值评定量表)。结果:方差分析(经典框架和贝叶斯框架)和时间序列分析一致显示,tDCS和tACS均降低了患者的日报告疼痛强度(tDCS: tau = -0.553; p)。结论:tDCS和tACS显著降低了慢性疼痛患者的日报告疼痛。以家庭为基础的干预可以显著减轻卫生保健系统中与慢性疼痛管理相关的高经济负担。纳入时间序列分析评估的每日报告可以改善慢性疼痛领域的临床试验。研究注册:ClinicalTrials.gov ID号:NCT05099406 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05099406?term=NCT05099406%20&rank=1)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) in chronic pain patients: effects on daily-reported symptoms.

Background: Transcranial electrical stimulation has yielded positive results for relieving pain in patients with chronic pain (CP), but the existing evidence is insufficient. In order to address some gaps in the literature, we conducted a randomized, double blind, sham-controlled clinical trial aimed at evaluating the feasibility and efficacy of home-based neurostimulation in a sample of 120 patients.

Methods: The patients completed 15 self-administered home-based sessions of either transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS, n = 48), transcranial alternate current stimulation (tACS, n = 48), or sham stimulation (n = 24). The primary outcome variable, i.e., pain intensity, and related variables were assessed online (using numerical rating scales from 0 to 10) throughout 45 days (pre-treatment, treatment, and post-treatment periods each of 15 days).

Results: ANOVA (classical and Bayesian frameworks) and time series analysis consistently showed that both tDCS and tACS decreased the patients' daily reported pain intensity (tDCS: tau = -0.553; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.563; p < 0.001), pain unpleasantness (tDCS: tau = -0.489; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.537; p < 0.001), interference due to pain (tDCS: tau = -0.368; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = -0.424; p < 0.001), and other symptoms such as fatigue (tDCS: tau = -0.255; p = 0.02; tACS: tau = -0.556; p < 0.001) and stress/anxiety (tDCS: tau = -0.245; p = 0.02; tACS: tau = -0.685; p < 0.001). No such improvement was observed in the group receiving the sham stimulation. The home-based treatment was associated with low drop-out rates (6.66%) and moderate satisfaction with the procedure (around 5 out of 10 in all groups), and minimal adverse effects of transcranial electrical stimulation were reported.

Conclusions: tDCS and tACS significantly reduced daily-reported pain in chronic pain patients. Home-based intervention could significantly reduce the high economic burden associated with chronic pain management in healthcare systems. Inclusion of daily reports assessed by time series analysis can improve clinical trials in the field of chronic pain.

Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID number: NCT05099406 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05099406?term=NCT05099406%20&rank=1).

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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.50%
发文量
150
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine (formerly Annales Françaises d''Anesthésie et de Réanimation) publishes in English the highest quality original material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信