Ana Paula S Salazar1, Patrícia G Vaz2, Ritchele R Marchese3, Cinara Stein4, Camila Pinto3, Aline S Pagnussat5. 1. Graduate Program in Rehabilitation Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Movement Analysis and Neurological Rehabilitation Laboratory, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil. Electronic address: anapsalazar@gmail.com. 2. Movement Analysis and Neurological Rehabilitation Laboratory, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Graduate Program in Health Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Centro Universitário Ritter dos Reis (UniRitter), Laureate International Universities, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 3. Graduate Program in Rehabilitation Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Movement Analysis and Neurological Rehabilitation Laboratory, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 4. Graduate Program in Health Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 5. Graduate Program in Rehabilitation Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Movement Analysis and Neurological Rehabilitation Laboratory, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Graduate Program in Health Sciences, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS)-repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)-on hemispatial neglect and performance in activities of daily living (ADL) after stroke. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, SciELO, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database were searched from database inception to December 2016. DATA SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials or crossover trials focused on determining the effects of tDCS or rTMS combined or not combined with other therapies for hemispatial neglect after stroke. DATA EXTRACTION: Methodological characteristics of the studies, number of participants, comparison groups, interventions, and outcomes were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Ten trials comprising 226 participants had data that were suitable for the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that NIBS combined with other therapies significantly improves hemispatial neglect (standardized mean difference [SMD]=-1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.57 to -1.25; I2=71%). A sensitivity analysis showed that rTMS (SMD=-2.16; 95% CI, -3.00 to -1.33; I2=76%) and tDCS (SMD=-1.07; 95% CI, -1.76 to -0.37; I2=0%) had positive effects on hemispatial neglect. Furthermore, both excitatory (SMD=-2.34; 95% CI, -3.56 to -1.12; I2=65%) and inhibitory (SMD=-1.69; 95% CI, -2.49 to -0.88; I2=75%) stimulations were effective. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis reveals moderate-quality evidence for the effectiveness of NIBS protocols combined with other therapies on hemispatial neglect and performance in ADL after stroke.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS)-repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)-on hemispatial neglect and performance in activities of daily living (ADL) after stroke. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, SciELO, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database were searched from database inception to December 2016. DATA SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials or crossover trials focused on determining the effects of tDCS or rTMS combined or not combined with other therapies for hemispatial neglect after stroke. DATA EXTRACTION: Methodological characteristics of the studies, number of participants, comparison groups, interventions, and outcomes were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Ten trials comprising 226 participants had data that were suitable for the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that NIBS combined with other therapies significantly improves hemispatial neglect (standardized mean difference [SMD]=-1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.57 to -1.25; I2=71%). A sensitivity analysis showed that rTMS (SMD=-2.16; 95% CI, -3.00 to -1.33; I2=76%) and tDCS (SMD=-1.07; 95% CI, -1.76 to -0.37; I2=0%) had positive effects on hemispatial neglect. Furthermore, both excitatory (SMD=-2.34; 95% CI, -3.56 to -1.12; I2=65%) and inhibitory (SMD=-1.69; 95% CI, -2.49 to -0.88; I2=75%) stimulations were effective. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis reveals moderate-quality evidence for the effectiveness of NIBS protocols combined with other therapies on hemispatial neglect and performance in ADL after stroke.
Keywords:
Neurological rehabilitation; Physical therapy modalities; Rehabilitation; Transcranial direct current stimulation; Transcranial magnetic stimulation
Authors: Veronika Vielsmeier; Martin Schecklmann; Winfried Schlee; Peter M Kreuzer; Timm B Poeppl; Rainer Rupprecht; Berthold Langguth; Astrid Lehner Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 4.677
Authors: Gemma Learmonth; Christopher S Y Benwell; Gesine Märker; Diana Dascalu; Matthew Checketts; Celestine Santosh; Mark Barber; Matthew Walters; Keith W Muir; Monika Harvey Journal: Neuropsychol Rehabil Date: 2020-06-05 Impact factor: 2.928
Authors: Lorenzo Diana; Giulia Scotti; Edoardo N Aiello; Patrick Pilastro; Aleksandra K Eberhard-Moscicka; René M Müri; Nadia Bolognini Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2021-12-31