| Literature DB >> 35190424 |
Andrew M Gordon1, Claudio L Ferre2,3, Maxime T Robert4, Karen Chin5,2, Marina Brandao6, Kathleen M Friel2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Unilateral spastic cerebral palsy (USCP) is characterised by movement deficits primarily on one body side. The best available upper extremity (UE) therapies are costly and intensive. Thus, there is an urgent need for better, more efficient and thus more accessible therapies. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is non-invasive and may enhance physical rehabilitation approaches. The aim of this study is to determine whether tDCS targeted to the hemisphere with corticospinal tract (CST) connectivity enhances the efficacy of UE training in children with USCP. Our central hypothesis is that hand-arm bimanual intensive therapy (HABIT) combined with a tDCS montage targeting the hemisphere with CST connectivity to the impaired UE muscles will improve UE function more than HABIT plus sham stimulation. We will test this by conducting a randomised clinical trial with clinical and motor cortex physiology outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSES: 81 children, aged 6-17 years, will be randomised to receive 2 mA anodal tDCS targeted to the affected UE motor map, 2 mA cathodal tDCS to the contralesional motor cortex or sham tDCS during the first 20 min of each HABIT session (10 hours: 2 hours/day for 5 days). Primary outcomes will be Box and Blocks Test, Assisting Hand Assessment and motor cortex excitability, determined with single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation. Secondary outcomes include ABILHAND-Kids, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, Cooper Stereognosis, Dimension of Mastery Questionnaire and Participation and Environment Measure-Children and Youth. All measures will be collected before, immediately and 6 months after treatment. A group × test session Analysis of Variance will test differences among groups on all measures. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the BRANY Institutional Review Board (#18-10-285-512). We will leverage our subject and family relationships to maximise dissemination and share results with the academic and patient/family advocacy groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03402854. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: neurology; neurophysiology; paediatric neurology
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35190424 PMCID: PMC8860006 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052409
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1CST connectivity patterns and tDCS montages. Top row: CST connectivity is maintained from lesioned hemisphere to affected hand. Targeted tDCS: anode placed over motor map of affected UE in affected hemisphere. Untargeted tDCS: cathode placed over less-affected hemisphere. Bottom row: CST connectivity is lost from lesioned hemisphere, and shifted to the ipsilateral hemisphere. Targeted tDCS: anode placed over motor map of affected UE in less affected hemisphere. Untargeted tDCS: cathode placed over less affected hemisphere. For all tDCS montages, the second electrode will be placed on the forehead contralateral to the first electrode. CST, corticospinal tract; tDCS, transcranial direct current stimulation; UE, upper extremity.
Figure 2Experimental design. tDCS, transcranial direct current stimulation; TMS, transcranial magnetic stimulation.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
| Criterion | Method of ascertainment | Justification |
|
| ||
| Age: 6–17 years | Medical records | Children <6 years of age may have difficulty tolerating procedures and may have small head size |
| Diagnosis of unilateral CP | Physical health screening and examination of neurological reports | Target population of the trial |
| Parent/guardian willing to provide informed consent | Meeting with principal investigator (PI) to discuss study and sign consent form | Required |
| Participant willing to provide informed assent | Meeting with PI to discuss study, signing assent form in the presence of PI | Required |
| Ability to pick up, hold and release a light object with affected hand | Pre-intervention screening measures and score under the maximum Jebsen-Taylor Test of Hand Function (JTTHF) ceiling of 1080s | Intervention may be too challenging for the child |
|
| ||
| Current medical illness unrelated to CP | Medical history and physical examination | May impair child’s ability to comply with trial and may affect study results |
| Seizure beyond 2 years of age, use of anti-seizure medication, history of epilepsy, cranial metal implants, structural brain lesion, devices that may be affected by tDCS or TMS (pacemaker, medication pump, cochlear implant and implanted brain stimulator) | Medical records, interview with participant and parent(s), and use of a checklist | TMS and tDCS may increase risk of seizure in subjects prone to seizures |
| Cognitive deficits | Pre-intervention screening measures; Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, score ±1 SD from normal | Child needs to understand study assent and instructions related to the testing and intervention |
| High motor ability in affected arm | JTTHF score of <50% differences between the two hands or score <100 secs | Child may not benefit from interventions due to mild hand function or extremely limited use of the affected hand |
| Severe spasticity | Pre-intervention screening measures; Modified Ashworth test score >3 (>moderate) | May confound ability to drive changes in motor control quality |
| Lack of asymmetry in hand function | Pre-intervention screening measures; JTTHF score of <50% differences between the two hands | May suggest bilateral CP |
| Orthopaedic surgery in affected arm in last 12 months | Medical records, interview with participant and parent(s) | Recovery may confound study results |
| Botulinum toxin therapy in either UE during last 6 months, or planned during the study period | Medical records and interview with participant and parent(s) | Change in tone may confound study results |
| Currently receiving intrathecal baclofen | Medical records and interview with participant and parent(s) | Change in tone may confound study results |
| True positive response on the TMS and tDCS safety screen | Interview with participant and parent(s) | Would indicate an increased risk of seizure |
| Current use of medications known to lower the seizure threshold | Medical records and interview with participant and parent(s) | Underlying condition may pose risk of seizure and medication may influence TMS results |
| Previous episode of unprovoked neurocardiogenic syncope | Medical records and interview with participant and parent(s) | Could be exacerbated by TMS |
| Indwelling metal or incompatible medical devices | Medical records and interview with participant and parent(s) | Metallic objects in body may shift during MRI, posing risk of injury |
| Centrally acting medications, including anti-seizure medications | Medical records and interview with participant and parent(s) | Underlying condition may pose risk of seizure and medication may influence TMS results |
| Evidence of scalp disease or skin abnormalities | Medical records and interview with participant and parent(s) | tDCS may exacerbate the skin condition or increase discomfort |
CP, cerebral palsy; tDCS, transcranial direct current stimulation; TMS, transcranial magnetic stimulation; UE, upper extremity.
Figure 3Assessments. AHA, Assisting Hand Assessment; BBT, Box and Blocks Test; CST, corticospinal tract; TMS, transcranial magnetic stimulation; UE, upper extremity. EMG, electromyography, DTI, diffusion tensor imaging.