Jaclyn Reckow1, Annalise Rahman-Filipiak1, Sarah Garcia2, Stephen Schlaefflin3, Oliver Calhoun3, Alexandre F DaSilva4, Marom Bikson5, Benjamin M Hampstead6. 1. Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Mental Health Service (116B), Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan, Department of Psychiatry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 2. University of Michigan, Department of Psychiatry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. Michigan Alzheimer's Disease Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 4. Headache & Orofacial Pain Effort (H.O.P.E.), Biologic & Materials Sciences, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, USA. 5. Department of Biomedical Engineering, The City College of New York, New York, NY, USA. 6. Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Mental Health Service (116B), Ann Arbor, MI, USA; University of Michigan, Department of Psychiatry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Michigan Alzheimer's Disease Center, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. Electronic address: bhampste@med.umich.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an in-demand form of neuromodulation generally regarded as safe and well tolerated. However, few studies have examined the safety, tolerability, or blinding of High Definition (HD-) tDCS, especially in older adults and at stimulation intensities of 2 milliamps (mA) or greater. OBJECTIVE: We examined the rates of serious adverse events and common side effects to establish safety and tolerability, respectively, in HD-tDCS. Blinding was evaluated using participants' accuracy in correctly stating their condition (i.e., active or sham). METHODS: The sample included 101 older adults (Mage = 69.69, SD = 8.33; Meduc = 16.27, SD = 2.42) who participated in our double blind randomized controlled studies or in case studies that used HD-tDCS for 20-30 min at 2 mA (n = 66, 31 active) or 3 mA (n = 35, 20 active). Participants completed a standardized side effect questionnaire and were asked whether they received active or sham stimulation at the end of each session. RESULTS: There were no serious adverse events and no participants withdrew, suggesting that HD-tDCS meets basic safety parameters. Tolerability was comparable between active and sham HD-tDCS regardless of intensity (2 mA and 3 mA) in first session (allp > .09). Tingling was the most commonly endorsed item (59% active; 56% sham) followed by burning sensation (51% active; 50% sham), the majority of which were mild in nature. "Severe" ratings were reported in fewer than 4% of sessions. Blinding appeared adequate since there were no significant group differences between individuals correctly stating their stimulation condition (χ2 = 0.689, p = .679). The above tolerability and blinding findings generally persisted when multiple session data (i.e., 186 total sessions) were considered. CONCLUSIONS:HD-tDCS appears well-tolerated and safe with effective sham-control in older adults, even at 3 mA. These data support the use of HD-tDCS in randomized controlled trials and clinical translation efforts. Published by Elsevier Inc.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an in-demand form of neuromodulation generally regarded as safe and well tolerated. However, few studies have examined the safety, tolerability, or blinding of High Definition (HD-) tDCS, especially in older adults and at stimulation intensities of 2 milliamps (mA) or greater. OBJECTIVE: We examined the rates of serious adverse events and common side effects to establish safety and tolerability, respectively, in HD-tDCS. Blinding was evaluated using participants' accuracy in correctly stating their condition (i.e., active or sham). METHODS: The sample included 101 older adults (Mage = 69.69, SD = 8.33; Meduc = 16.27, SD = 2.42) who participated in our double blind randomized controlled studies or in case studies that used HD-tDCS for 20-30 min at 2 mA (n = 66, 31 active) or 3 mA (n = 35, 20 active). Participants completed a standardized side effect questionnaire and were asked whether they received active or sham stimulation at the end of each session. RESULTS: There were no serious adverse events and no participants withdrew, suggesting that HD-tDCS meets basic safety parameters. Tolerability was comparable between active and sham HD-tDCS regardless of intensity (2 mA and 3 mA) in first session (allp > .09). Tingling was the most commonly endorsed item (59% active; 56% sham) followed by burning sensation (51% active; 50% sham), the majority of which were mild in nature. "Severe" ratings were reported in fewer than 4% of sessions. Blinding appeared adequate since there were no significant group differences between individuals correctly stating their stimulation condition (χ2 = 0.689, p = .679). The above tolerability and blinding findings generally persisted when multiple session data (i.e., 186 total sessions) were considered. CONCLUSIONS:HD-tDCS appears well-tolerated and safe with effective sham-control in older adults, even at 3 mA. These data support the use of HD-tDCS in randomized controlled trials and clinical translation efforts. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Marilyn S Albert; Steven T DeKosky; Dennis Dickson; Bruno Dubois; Howard H Feldman; Nick C Fox; Anthony Gamst; David M Holtzman; William J Jagust; Ronald C Petersen; Peter J Snyder; Maria C Carrillo; Bill Thies; Creighton H Phelps Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2011-04-21 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Jeffrey J Borckardt; Marom Bikson; Heather Frohman; Scott T Reeves; Abhishek Datta; Varun Bansal; Alok Madan; Kelly Barth; Mark S George Journal: J Pain Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Géza Gergely Ambrus; Hanan Al-Moyed; Leila Chaieb; Lena Sarp; Andrea Antal; Walter Paulus Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2012-02-22 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Neil E O'Connell; John Cossar; Louise Marston; Benedict M Wand; David Bunce; G Lorimer Moseley; Lorraine H De Souza Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-10-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Marom Bikson; Zeinab Esmaeilpour; Devin Adair; Greg Kronberg; William J Tyler; Andrea Antal; Abhishek Datta; Bernhard A Sabel; Michael A Nitsche; Colleen Loo; Dylan Edwards; Hamed Ekhtiari; Helena Knotkova; Adam J Woods; Benjamin M Hampstead; Bashar W Badran; Angel V Peterchev Journal: Brain Stimul Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 8.955
Authors: Hanne Massonet; Ann Goeleven; Leen Van den Steen; Alice Vergauwen; Margot Baudelet; Gilles Van Haesendonck; Olivier Vanderveken; Heleen Bollen; Lisette van der Molen; Fréderic Duprez; Peter Tomassen; Sandra Nuyts; Gwen Van Nuffelen Journal: Trials Date: 2022-10-22 Impact factor: 2.728
Authors: Benjamin M Hampstead; Nathan Mascaro; Stephen Schlaefflin; Arijit Bhaumik; Julia Laing; Scott Peltier; Brian Martis Journal: Int J Psychophysiol Date: 2019-11-26 Impact factor: 2.997