Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22204615›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2011

Effectiveness of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with chronic low back pain: design, method and protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Kerstin Luedtke, Alison Rushton, Christine Wright, Tim P Juergens, Gerd Mueller, Arne May

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Safe direct current stimulation to expand capabilities of neural prostheses.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2013
    Article
  4. Safe direct current stimulator 2: concept and design.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kerstin LuedtkeInstitute of Systems Neurosciences, University Hospital Eppendorf, Martinistr,52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany. kluedtke@uke.uni-hamburg.de
Alison Rushton
Christine Wright
Tim P Juergens
Gerd Mueller
Arne May

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectrical stimulation of central nervous system areas with surgically implanted stimulators has been shown to result in pain relief. To avoid the risks and side effects of surgery, transcranial direct current stimulation is an option to electrically stimulate the motor cortex through the skull. Previous research has shown that transcranial direct current stimulation relieves pain in patients with fibromyalgia, chronic neuropathic pain and chronic pelvic pain. Evidence indicates that the method is pain free, safe and inexpensive. METHODS/

designA randomised controlled trial has been designed to evaluate the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation over the motor cortex for pain reduction in patients with chronic low back pain. It will also investigate whether transcranial direct current stimulation as a prior treatment enhances the symptom reduction achieved by a cognitive-behavioural group intervention. Participants will be randomised to receive a series of 5 days of transcranial direct current stimulation (2 mA, 20 mins) or 20 mins of sham stimulation; followed by a cognitive-behavioural group programme. The primary outcome parameters will measure pain (Visual Analog Scale) and disability (Oswestry Disability Index). Secondary outcome parameters will include the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, the Funktionsfragebogen Hannover (perceived function), Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale, bothersomeness and Health Related Quality of Life (SF 36), as well as Patient-Perceived Satisfactory Improvement. Assessments will take place immediately prior to the first application of transcranial direct current stimulation or sham, after 5 consecutive days of stimulation, immediately after the cognitive-behavioural group programme and at 4 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks follow-up. DISCUSSION: This trial will help to determine, whether transcranial direct current stimulation is an effective treatment for patients with chronic low back pain and whether it can further enhance the effects of a cognitive behavioural pain management programme.

Indexed as

Research DesignChronic PainCognitive Behavioral TherapyDisability EvaluationDouble-Blind MethodElectric Stimulation TherapyGermanyHumansLow Back PainMotor CortexPain MeasurementPatient SatisfactionQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22204615
PMCPMC3339335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.