Cargando…

Comparison of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Recovery Among Patients With Recent Stroke

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on upper limb function recovery among patients who recently had stroke. METHODS: Subjects with recent stroke (within 1 month) were randomized to rTMS (n=25) an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Doris Miu, Ka Ying, Kok, Ching, Leung, Sau Shan, Chan, Elaine Y. L., Wong, Elaine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7808788/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33440091
http://dx.doi.org/10.5535/arm.20093
_version_ 1783636975654273024
author Doris Miu, Ka Ying
Kok, Ching
Leung, Sau Shan
Chan, Elaine Y. L.
Wong, Elaine
author_facet Doris Miu, Ka Ying
Kok, Ching
Leung, Sau Shan
Chan, Elaine Y. L.
Wong, Elaine
author_sort Doris Miu, Ka Ying
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on upper limb function recovery among patients who recently had stroke. METHODS: Subjects with recent stroke (within 1 month) were randomized to rTMS (n=25) and tDCS (n=26) applied over the non-lesioned hemisphere for three sessions per week, followed by tailored upper limb rehabilitation training for a total of 2 weeks. The primary outcomes were changes in the Motor Assessment Scale (MAS), Fugl-Meyer arm score test, Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT), hand grip strength, and modified Barthel Index at weeks 2 and 4. Both therapists responsible for training and assessment were blinded to the intervention allocated. RESULTS: There was an improvement in all the motor performance scales among both groups (p<0.001). These improvements persisted at discharge. However, there was no significant difference in any of the assessment scales between the two groups. The rTMS group showed a statistically non-significant greater improvement in MAS, 9HPT, and handgrip strength than the tDCS group. CONCLUSION: Both interventions produce a statistically significant improvement in upper limb function. There was no statistically significant difference between the two intervention methods with respect to motor performance. It is suggested that a larger study may help to clarify the superiority of either methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7808788
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Korean Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78087882021-01-26 Comparison of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Recovery Among Patients With Recent Stroke Doris Miu, Ka Ying Kok, Ching Leung, Sau Shan Chan, Elaine Y. L. Wong, Elaine Ann Rehabil Med Original Article OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on upper limb function recovery among patients who recently had stroke. METHODS: Subjects with recent stroke (within 1 month) were randomized to rTMS (n=25) and tDCS (n=26) applied over the non-lesioned hemisphere for three sessions per week, followed by tailored upper limb rehabilitation training for a total of 2 weeks. The primary outcomes were changes in the Motor Assessment Scale (MAS), Fugl-Meyer arm score test, Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT), hand grip strength, and modified Barthel Index at weeks 2 and 4. Both therapists responsible for training and assessment were blinded to the intervention allocated. RESULTS: There was an improvement in all the motor performance scales among both groups (p<0.001). These improvements persisted at discharge. However, there was no significant difference in any of the assessment scales between the two groups. The rTMS group showed a statistically non-significant greater improvement in MAS, 9HPT, and handgrip strength than the tDCS group. CONCLUSION: Both interventions produce a statistically significant improvement in upper limb function. There was no statistically significant difference between the two intervention methods with respect to motor performance. It is suggested that a larger study may help to clarify the superiority of either methods. Korean Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine 2020-12 2020-12-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7808788/ /pubmed/33440091 http://dx.doi.org/10.5535/arm.20093 Text en Copyright © 2020 by Korean Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Doris Miu, Ka Ying
Kok, Ching
Leung, Sau Shan
Chan, Elaine Y. L.
Wong, Elaine
Comparison of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Recovery Among Patients With Recent Stroke
title Comparison of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Recovery Among Patients With Recent Stroke
title_full Comparison of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Recovery Among Patients With Recent Stroke
title_fullStr Comparison of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Recovery Among Patients With Recent Stroke
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Recovery Among Patients With Recent Stroke
title_short Comparison of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper Limb Recovery Among Patients With Recent Stroke
title_sort comparison of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation on upper limb recovery among patients with recent stroke
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7808788/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33440091
http://dx.doi.org/10.5535/arm.20093
work_keys_str_mv AT dorismiukaying comparisonofrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationonupperlimbrecoveryamongpatientswithrecentstroke
AT kokching comparisonofrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationonupperlimbrecoveryamongpatientswithrecentstroke
AT leungsaushan comparisonofrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationonupperlimbrecoveryamongpatientswithrecentstroke
AT chanelaineyl comparisonofrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationonupperlimbrecoveryamongpatientswithrecentstroke
AT wongelaine comparisonofrepetitivetranscranialmagneticstimulationandtranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationonupperlimbrecoveryamongpatientswithrecentstroke