Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36674035›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Do Higher Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Doses Lead to Greater Gains in Upper Limb Motor Function in Post-Stroke Patients?

Raylene Pires, Adriana Baltar, Maria Paz Sanchez, Gabriel Barreto Antonino, Rodrigo Brito, Marina Berenguer-Rocha, Katia Monte-Silva

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Comparative efficacy of different noninvasive brain stimulation protocols on upper-extremity motor function and activities of daily living after stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors.

Raylene PiresApplied Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife 50670-900, Brazil.
Adriana BaltarApplied Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife 50670-900, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2812-9343
Maria Paz SanchezApplied Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife 50670-900, Brazil.
Gabriel Barreto AntoninoApplied Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife 50670-900, Brazil.
Rodrigo BritoApplied Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife 50670-900, Brazil.
Marina Berenguer-RochaApplied Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife 50670-900, Brazil.
Katia Monte-SilvaApplied Neuroscience Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife 50670-900, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-7301-2553

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether a higher number of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) sessions results in a greater improvement in upper limb function in chronic post-stroke patients. Materials and methods: A randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind clinical trial was conducted in 57 chronic post-stroke patients (≥ 3 months after their injuries). The patients were allocated to receive sessions of tDCS combined with physiotherapy and divided into three groups (anodal, cathodal, and sham). The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Upper Extremity (FMA-UE) was used to assess the sensorimotor impairment of the patients’ upper limbs before (baseline) and after five and ten sessions. The percentage of patients who achieved a clinically significant improvement (> five points on the FMA-UE) was also analyzed. Results: The FMA-UE score increased after five and ten sessions in both the anodal and cathodal tDCS groups, respectively, compared to the baseline. However, in the sham group, the FMA-UE score increased only after ten sessions. When compared to the sham group, the mean difference from the baseline after five sessions was higher in the anodal tDCS group. The percentage of individuals who achieved greater clinical improvement was higher in the stimulation groups than in the sham group and after ten sessions when compared to five sessions. Conclusions: Our results suggest that five tDCS sessions are sufficient to augment the effect of standard physiotherapy on upper limb function recovery in chronic post-stroke patients, and ten sessions resulted in greater gains.

Indexed as

StrokeStroke RehabilitationTranscranial Direct Current StimulationHumansRecovery of FunctionTreatment OutcomeUpper Extremitydose–responsestimulation parametersstroketranscranial direct current stimulationupper limb

Identifiers

PMID36674035
PMCPMC9859554

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.