Literature DB >> 17188568

A real electro-magnetic placebo (REMP) device for sham transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).

Simone Rossi1, Marisa Ferro, Massimo Cincotta, Monica Ulivelli, Sabina Bartalini, Carlo Miniussi, Fabio Giovannelli, Stefano Passero.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: There is growing interest in neuropsychiatry for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as a neuromodulatory treatment. However, there are limitations in interpreting rTMS effects as a real consequence of physiological brain changes or as placebo-mediated unspecific effects, which may be particularly strong in psychiatric patients. This is due to the fact that existing sham rTMS procedures are less than optimal. A new placebo tool is introduced here, called real electro-magnetic placebo (REMP) device, which can simulate the scalp sensation induced by the real TMS, while leaving both the visual impact and acoustic sensation of real TMS unaltered.
METHODS: Physical, neurophysiological and behavioural variables of monophasic and biphasic single-pulse TMS and biphasic 1Hz and 20Hz rTMS procedures (at different intensities) were tested in subjects who were expert or naïve of TMS. Results of the real TMS were compared with those induced by the REMP device and with two other currently used sham procedures, namely the commercially available Magstim sham coil and tilting the real coil by 90 degrees .
RESULTS: The REMP device, besides producing scalp sensations similar to the real TMS, attenuated the TMS-induced electric field (as measured by a dipole probe) to a biologically inactive level. Behaviourally, neither expert nor naïve TMS subjects identified the "coil at 90 degrees " or the "Magstim sham coil" as a real TMS intervention, whilst naïve subjects were significantly more likely to identify the REMP-attenuated TMS as real.
CONCLUSIONS: The "goodness of sham" of the REMP device is demonstrated by physical, neurophysiological, and behavioural results. SIGNIFICANCE: Such placebo TMS is superior to the available sham procedures when applied on subjects naïve to TMS, as in case of patients undergoing a clinical rTMS trial.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17188568     DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2006.11.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol        ISSN: 1388-2457            Impact factor:   3.708


  35 in total

Review 1.  Neuromodulation interventions for addictive disorders: challenges, promise, and roadmap for future research.

Authors:  Primavera A Spagnolo; David Goldman
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 13.501

Review 2.  Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) Therapy in Parkinson Disease: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Aparna Wagle Shukla; Jonathan J Shuster; Jae Woo Chung; David E Vaillancourt; Carolynn Patten; Jill Ostrem; Michael S Okun
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 2.298

3.  Pain during transcranial magnetic stimulation in youth.

Authors:  Paul E Coarkin; Christopher A Wall; Jessica D King; F Andrew Kozel; Zafiris J Daskalakis
Journal:  Innov Clin Neurosci       Date:  2011-12

4.  Human cortical theta reactivity to high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Authors:  Nor Azila Noh; Giorgio Fuggetta
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-08-05       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 5.  Noninvasive brain stimulation: from physiology to network dynamics and back.

Authors:  Eran Dayan; Nitzan Censor; Ethan R Buch; Marco Sandrini; Leonardo G Cohen
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2013-06-25       Impact factor: 24.884

Review 6.  [Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in basic and clinical neuroscience research].

Authors:  A Valero-Cabré; A Pascual-Leone; O A Coubard
Journal:  Rev Neurol (Paris)       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 2.607

7.  Randomized Sham Controlled Double-blind Trial of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Adults With Severe Tourette Syndrome.

Authors:  Angeli Landeros-Weisenberger; Antonio Mantovani; Maria G Motlagh; Pedro Gomes de Alvarenga; Liliya Katsovich; James F Leckman; Sarah H Lisanby
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 8.955

Review 8.  Safety, ethical considerations, and application guidelines for the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical practice and research.

Authors:  Simone Rossi; Mark Hallett; Paolo M Rossini; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 3.708

9.  Focal electrical stimulation as an effective sham control for active rTMS and biofeedback treatments.

Authors:  Christine E Sheffer; Mark S Mennemeier; Reid D Landes; John Dornhoffer; Timothy Kimbrell; Warren K Bickel; Sharon Brackman; Kenneth C Chelette; Ginger Brown; Mai Vuong
Journal:  Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback       Date:  2013-09

10.  Development and evaluation of a portable sham transcranial magnetic stimulation system.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Borckardt; John Walker; R Kyle Branham; Sofia Rydin-Gray; Caroline Hunter; Heather Beeson; Scott T Reeves; Alok Madan; Harold Sackeim; Mark S George
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 8.955

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.