Derrick Matthew Buchanan1,2,3, Thomas Bogdanowicz1,2, Neha Khanna1,2, Guillaume Lockman-Dufour1,2, Philippe Robaey1,3,4, Amedeo D'Angiulli1,2. 1. Department of Neuroscience, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada. 2. Neuroscience of Imagination Cognition Emotion Research Lab, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada. 3. Neuropsychiatric Lab, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L1, Canada. 4. Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a safe, tolerable, and acceptable technique in adults. However, there is limited evidence for its safety in youth. Although limited, there are a handful of important empirical articles that have evaluated safety and tolerability outcomes in youth. However, a synthesis of pediatric safety studies is not currently available. OBJECTIVE: To synthesize objective evidence regarding the safety and tolerability of pediatric tDCS based on the current state of the literature. METHODS: Our search and report used PRISMA guidelines. Our method systematically examined investigations purposefully designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and acceptability of tDCS in healthy and atypical youth that were submitted to three databases, from the beginning of the database to November 2019. Safety considerations were evaluated by studies utilizing neuroimaging, physiological changes, performance on tasks, and by analyzing reported and objective side effects; tolerability via rate of adverse events; and acceptability via rate of dropouts. RESULTS: We report on 203 sham sessions, 864 active sessions up to 2 mA, and 303 active hours of stimulation in 156 children. A total of 4.4% of the active sessions were in neurotypical controls, with the other 95.6% in clinical subjects. CONCLUSION: In spite of the fact that the current evidence is sporadic and scarce, the presently reviewed literature provides support for the safety, tolerability, and acceptability, of tDCS in youth for 1-20 sessions of 20 min up to 2 mA. Future pediatric tDCS research is encouraged.
BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a safe, tolerable, and acceptable technique in adults. However, there is limited evidence for its safety in youth. Although limited, there are a handful of important empirical articles that have evaluated safety and tolerability outcomes in youth. However, a synthesis of pediatric safety studies is not currently available. OBJECTIVE: To synthesize objective evidence regarding the safety and tolerability of pediatric tDCS based on the current state of the literature. METHODS: Our search and report used PRISMA guidelines. Our method systematically examined investigations purposefully designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and acceptability of tDCS in healthy and atypical youth that were submitted to three databases, from the beginning of the database to November 2019. Safety considerations were evaluated by studies utilizing neuroimaging, physiological changes, performance on tasks, and by analyzing reported and objective side effects; tolerability via rate of adverse events; and acceptability via rate of dropouts. RESULTS: We report on 203 sham sessions, 864 active sessions up to 2 mA, and 303 active hours of stimulation in 156 children. A total of 4.4% of the active sessions were in neurotypical controls, with the other 95.6% in clinical subjects. CONCLUSION: In spite of the fact that the current evidence is sporadic and scarce, the presently reviewed literature provides support for the safety, tolerability, and acceptability, of tDCS in youth for 1-20 sessions of 20 min up to 2 mA. Future pediatric tDCS research is encouraged.
Authors: Bernadette T Gillick; Tim Feyma; Jeremiah Menk; Michelle Usset; Amy Vaith; Teddi Jean Wood; Rebecca Worthington; Linda E Krach Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2014-11-20
Authors: Jacek P Dmochowski; Abhishek Datta; Yu Huang; Jessica D Richardson; Marom Bikson; Julius Fridriksson; Lucas C Parra Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2013-03-05 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Dennis Q Truong; Greta Magerowski; George L Blackburn; Marom Bikson; Miguel Alonso-Alonso Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Leigh E Charvet; Margaret Kasschau; Abhishek Datta; Helena Knotkova; Michael C Stevens; Angelo Alonzo; Colleen Loo; Kevin R Krull; Marom Bikson Journal: Front Syst Neurosci Date: 2015-03-17
Authors: Xiong Jiang; Sophia Dahmani; Margarita Bronshteyn; Fan Nils Yang; John Paul Ryan; R Craig Gallagher; Srikanth R Damera; Princy N Kumar; David J Moore; Ronald J Ellis; Peter E Turkeltaub Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-06-03 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Giordano D'Urso; Elena Toscano; Veronica Sanges; Anne Sauvaget; Christine E Sheffer; Maria Pia Riccio; Roberta Ferrucci; Felice Iasevoli; Alberto Priori; Carmela Bravaccio; Andrea de Bartolomeis Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-12-28 Impact factor: 4.241