scholarly journals Noninvasive brain stimulation combined with exercise in chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 401-412
Author(s):  
Alejandra Cardenas-Rojas ◽  
Kevin Pacheco-Barrios ◽  
Stefano Giannoni-Luza ◽  
Oscar Rivera-Torrejon ◽  
Felipe Fregni
2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (9) ◽  
pp. 1336-1345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara M. Vacas ◽  
Florindo Stella ◽  
Julia C. Loureiro ◽  
Frederico Simões do Couto ◽  
Albino J. Oliveira-Maia ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 355-366.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Paula S. Salazar ◽  
Patrícia G. Vaz ◽  
Ritchele R. Marchese ◽  
Cinara Stein ◽  
Camila Pinto ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 56 (10) ◽  
pp. 1565-1596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lívia Shirahige ◽  
Lorena Melo ◽  
Fernanda Nogueira ◽  
Sérgio Rocha ◽  
Kátia Monte-Silva

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Pellegrini ◽  
Maryam Zoghi ◽  
Shapour Jaberzadeh

AbstractNoninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) modifies corticospinal excitability (CSE) historically in a predictable manner dependent on stimulation parameters. Researchers, however, discuss high degrees of variability between individuals, either responding as expected or not responding as expected. The explanation for this interindividual variability remains unknown with suggested interplay between stimulation parameters and variations in biological, anatomical, and physiological factors. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effect of variation in inherent factors within an individual (biological and anatomical factors) on CSE in response to NIBS of the primary motor cortex. Twenty-two studies were included investigating genetic variation (n=7), age variation (n=4), gender variation (n=7), and anatomical variation (n=5). The results indicate that variation in brain-derived neurotrophic factor genotypes may have an effect on CSE after NIBS. Variation between younger and older adults also affects CSE after NIBS. Variation between age-matched males and females does not affect CSE after NIBS, but variation across the menstrual cycle does. Variation between skull thickness and brain tissue morphology influences the electric field magnitude that ultimately reaches the primary motor cortex. These findings indicate that biological and anatomical variations may in part account for interindividual variability in CSE in response to NIBS of the primary motor cortex, categorizing individuals as responding as expected (responders) or not responding as expected (nonresponders).


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Graef Vaz ◽  
Ana Paula da Silva Salazar ◽  
Cinara Stein ◽  
Ritchele Redivo Marchese ◽  
Janice Luisa Lukrafka ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 154596832198935
Author(s):  
Suzana Bleckmann Reis ◽  
Wanderley Marques Bernardo ◽  
Carlos Andre Oshiro ◽  
Hermano Igo Krebs ◽  
Adriana Bastos Conforto

Background Robot-assisted therapy and noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) are promising strategies for stroke rehabilitation. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the evidence of NIBS as an add-on intervention to robotic therapy in order to improve outcomes of upper-limb motor impairment or activity in individuals with stroke. Methods This study was performed according to the PRISMA Protocol and was previously registered on the PROSPERO Platform (CRD42017054563). Seven databases and gray literature were systematically searched by 2 reviewers, and 1176 registers were accessed. Eight randomized clinical trials with upper-limb body structure/function or activity limitation outcome measures were included. Subgroup analyses were performed according to phase poststroke, device characteristics (ie, arm support, joints involved, unimanual or bimanual training), NIBS paradigm, timing of stimulation, and number of sessions. The Grade-Pro Software was used to assess quality of the evidence. Results A nonsignificant homogeneous summary effect size was found both for body structure function domain (mean difference [MD] = 0.15; 95% CI = −3.10 to 3.40; P = 0.93; I2 = 0%) and activity limitation domain (standard MD = 0.03; 95% CI = −0.28 to 0.33; P = 0.87; I2 = 0%). Conclusions According to this systematic review and meta-analysis, at the moment, there are not enough data about the benefits of NIBS as an add-on intervention to robot-assisted therapy on upper-limb motor function or activity in individuals with stroke.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document