BACKGROUND: There is much interest in whether daily left prefrontal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over several weeks may become a clinically useful antidepressant treatment. Although rTMS appears largely safe, many patients report that this procedure is somewhat painful, which may restrict its ultimate appeal and utility. We analyzed interim results from the open-label phase of a multi-site randomized trial of rTMS as a treatment for depression to investigate whether the procedural pain of left prefrontal rTMS changes over time. METHODS:Patients with unipolar depression who had failed to respond during at least three weeks of thesham-controlled double-masked rTMS were then offered three more weeks (15 sessions) of open-label rTMS. Retrospective pain ratings and state emotional factors from 20 subjects were assessed using visual analog scales (VAS) recorded on computers before and after each treatment (289 sessions). RESULTS: Over the 15 treatment sessions, subjective reports of the painfulness of rTMS decreased 48% from baseline. This reduction, although greatest in the first few days, continued steadily (average 2.11 points per session) over the 3 weeks of treatment. The analysis found a significant effect for rTMS-session (p<0.0001) on rTMS-procedural pain over and above changes in subjective emotional states. CONCLUSION: The procedural pain of left, prefrontal rTMS decreases over time, apparently independently of other emotional changes. Since rTMS scalp pain may decline over time, physicians and patients may decide to continue treatment despite initial discomfort. These observational data can be better tested once the data from the blinded phase of the trial becomes available.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: There is much interest in whether daily left prefrontal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over several weeks may become a clinically useful antidepressant treatment. Although rTMS appears largely safe, many patients report that this procedure is somewhat painful, which may restrict its ultimate appeal and utility. We analyzed interim results from the open-label phase of a multi-site randomized trial of rTMS as a treatment for depression to investigate whether the procedural pain of left prefrontal rTMS changes over time. METHODS:Patients with unipolar depression who had failed to respond during at least three weeks of the sham-controlled double-masked rTMS were then offered three more weeks (15 sessions) of open-label rTMS. Retrospective pain ratings and state emotional factors from 20 subjects were assessed using visual analog scales (VAS) recorded on computers before and after each treatment (289 sessions). RESULTS: Over the 15 treatment sessions, subjective reports of the painfulness of rTMS decreased 48% from baseline. This reduction, although greatest in the first few days, continued steadily (average 2.11 points per session) over the 3 weeks of treatment. The analysis found a significant effect for rTMS-session (p<0.0001) on rTMS-procedural pain over and above changes in subjective emotional states. CONCLUSION: The procedural pain of left, prefrontal rTMS decreases over time, apparently independently of other emotional changes. Since rTMS scalp pain may decline over time, physicians and patients may decide to continue treatment despite initial discomfort. These observational data can be better tested once the data from the blinded phase of the trial becomes available.
Authors: David H Avery; Paul E Holtzheimer; Walid Fawaz; Joan Russo; John Neumaier; David L Dunner; David R Haynor; Keith H Claypoole; Chandra Wajdik; Peter Roy-Byrne Journal: J Nerv Ment Dis Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.254
Authors: M S George; E M Wassermann; W A Williams; J Steppel; A Pascual-Leone; P Basser; M Hallett; R M Post Journal: J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 1996 Impact factor: 2.198
Authors: Jeffrey J Borckardt; Mitchel Weinstein; Scott T Reeves; F Andrew Kozel; Ziad Nahas; Arthur R Smith; T Karl Byrne; Katherine Morgan; Mark S George Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Jeffrey J Borckardt; Arthur R Smith; Kelby Hutcheson; Kevin Johnson; Ziad Nahas; Berry Anderson; M Bret Schneider; Scott T Reeves; Mark S George Journal: J ECT Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 3.635
Authors: John P O'Reardon; H Brent Solvason; Philip G Janicak; Shirlene Sampson; Keith E Isenberg; Ziad Nahas; William M McDonald; David Avery; Paul B Fitzgerald; Colleen Loo; Mark A Demitrack; Mark S George; Harold A Sackeim Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2007-06-14 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Kevin A Johnson; Mirza Baig; Dave Ramsey; Sarah H Lisanby; David Avery; William M McDonald; Xingbao Li; Elisabeth R Bernhardt; David R Haynor; Paul E Holtzheimer; Harold A Sackeim; Mark S George; Ziad Nahas Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2012-03-14 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Xingbao Li; Karen J Hartwell; Max Owens; Todd Lematty; Jeffrey J Borckardt; Colleen A Hanlon; Kathleen T Brady; Mark S George Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Tarique Perera; Mark S George; Geoffrey Grammer; Philip G Janicak; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Theodore S Wirecki Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Jeffrey J Borckardt; Ziad H Nahas; John Teal; Sarah H Lisanby; William M McDonald; David Avery; Valerie Durkalski; Martina Pavlicova; James M Long; Harold A Sackeim; Mark S George Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Christopher A Wall; Paul E Croarkin; Mandie J Maroney-Smith; Laura M Haugen; Joshua M Baruth; Mark A Frye; Shirlene M Sampson; John D Port Journal: J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol Date: 2016-02-05 Impact factor: 2.576
Authors: Bernardo Dell'osso; Giulia Camuri; Filippo Castellano; Vittoria Vecchi; Matteo Benedetti; Sara Bortolussi; A Carlo Altamura Journal: Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health Date: 2011-10-26
Authors: M A Day; D M Ehde; J Burns; L C Ward; J L Friedly; B E Thorn; M A Ciol; E Mendoza; J F Chan; S Battalio; J Borckardt; M P Jensen Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2020-04-14 Impact factor: 2.226