Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25883244›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2015

Effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation preceding cognitive behavioural management for chronic low back pain: sham controlled double blinded randomised controlled trial.

Kerstin Luedtke, Alison Rushton, Christine Wright, Tim Jürgens, Astrid Polzer, Gerd Mueller, Arne May

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 55 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

NCT05156242 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Corticospinal and Motor Behavior Responses After 6-week Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Combined With Motor Control Exercises in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorMahidol UniversityRan2021 to 2024Enrolled96ConditionsLow Back PainArmsActive-tDCS priming MCE, Sham-tDCS priming MCE, NMES priming MCE, Conventional physical therapy
NCT07303998 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Feasibility and Effect of Remotely Supervised Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation With Chair Yoga for Chronic Knee Pain Management in Older Adults With Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ArizonaRan2025 to 2026Enrolled40ConditionsAlzheimer&Amp, #39, s Disease, Other DementiasArmsActive tDCS paired with active online chair yoga
NCT07432841 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Innovative Neuromodulation Treatments for Chronic Pain: Assessing and Predicting the Effects of Personalized High-Definition Protocols for Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS)

TypeinterventionalSponsorIstituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri SpARan2025 to 2027Enrolled144ConditionsChronic PainArmsAnodal High-Definition transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Cathodal High-Definition transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Sham (No Treatment)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 104 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Brain stimulation targets for chronic pain: Insights from meta-analysis, functional connectivity and literature review.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2024
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  11. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Kerstin LuedtkeDepartment of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany.
Alison RushtonSchool of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Christine WrightSchool of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Tim JürgensDepartment of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany.
Astrid PolzerDepartment of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany.
Gerd MuellerBackpain Clinic "Am Michel", Ludwig-Erhard-Str.18, 20459 Hamburg, Germany.
Arne MayDepartment of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany a.may@uke.de.
Universität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Birmingham · GBRückenzentrum am Michel · DEUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation alone and in combination with cognitive behavioural management in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain.

designDouble blind parallel group randomised controlled trial with six months' follow-up conducted May 2011-March 2013. Participants, physiotherapists, assessors, and analyses were blinded to group allocation.

settingInterdisciplinary chronic pain centre.

participants135 participants with non-specific chronic low back pain >12 weeks were recruited from 225 patients assessed for eligibility.

interventionParticipants were randomised to receive anodal (20 minutes to motor cortex at 2 mA) or sham transcranial direct current stimulation (identical electrode position, stimulator switched off after 30 seconds) for five consecutive days immediately before cognitive behavioural management (four week multidisciplinary programme of 80 hours). MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Two primary outcome measures of pain intensity (0-100 visual analogue scale) and disability (Oswestry disability index) were evaluated at two primary endpoints after stimulation and after cognitive behavioural management.

resultsAnalyses of covariance with baseline values (pain or disability) as covariates showed that transcranial direct current stimulation was ineffective for the reduction of pain (difference between groups on visual analogue scale 1 mm (99% confidence interval -8.69 mm to 6.3 mm; P=0.68)) and disability (difference between groups 1 point (-1.73 to 1.98; P=0.86)) and did not influence the outcome of cognitive behavioural management (difference between group 3 mm (-10.32 mm to 6.73 mm); P=0.58; difference between groups on Oswestry disability index 0 point (-2.45 to 2.62); P=0.92). The stimulation was well tolerated with minimal transitory side effects.

conclusionsThis results of this trial on the effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation for the reduction of pain and disability do not support its clinical use for managing non-specific chronic low back pain.Trial registration Current controlled trials ISRCTN89874874.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyTranscranial Direct Current StimulationAdolescentAdultAgedChronic PainCombined Modality TherapyDisability EvaluationDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedModels, Statistical

Identifiers

PMID25883244
PMCPMC4399394
OpenAlexW2128778210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.