Useless. I see nothing here that any objective starting points were identified, so not repeatable. No protocols came from it so not helpful in any regard for survivors.
Using Fugl-Meyer for anything in stroke is the height of stupidity, nothing objective in it, so nothing is repeatable.
tDCS wouldn't work on me since it is not going to enervate dead neurons, so I'm still screwed until something more useful comes along.
And they didn't do hd-tDCS so more research still needed.
Do mentors and senior researchers even think before starting research?
Effects of electrode configurations in transcranial direct current stimulation after stroke
Kenneth Chelette¹
, Cheryl Carrico
¹
, Laurie Nichols
¹
, Emily Salyers
¹
, Lumy Sawaki
¹
¹
University of Kentucky, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Cardinal Hill Rehabilitation Hospital Lexington, KY, USA
Abstract
—Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a form of non-invasive brain stimulation that can modulate neuroplasticity (the capacity for brain reorganization). Neuroplastic change correlates with upper extremity (UE) recovery after brain lesions. Different electrode configurations of tDCS paired with UE motor training can have different effects in distinct populations. We are conducting the first randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to investigate which tDCS configuration may best enhance outcomes of UE motor training for stroke survivors with chronic,
severe hemiparesis (i.e., little or no wrist or hand movement). We have assigned subjects to 1 of 4 groups: 1) “Anodal”: anodal tDCS to excite ipsilesional motor cortex; 2) “Cathodal”: cathodal tDCS to inhibit contralesional motor cortex; 3) “Dual”: a simultaneous combination of anodal and cathodal tDCS; or 4) “Sham” tDCS. Intervention (10 sessions) consists of tDCS followed by 3 hours of intensive, task-oriented UE training in each session. Our primary outcome measure is Fugl-Meyer Assessment. Our secondary outcome measures are Action Research Arm Test and Stroke Impact Scale. We have conducted evaluations at baseline and post-intervention. Preliminary results from 26 of (projected) 44 subjects indicate substantially greater improvement for the “Cathodal” group than other groups. These findings differ from evidence about tDCS in rehabilitation of mild-to-moderate hemiparesis. Completion of our study will include full analysis of neuroplastic change associated with intervention.
No comments:
Post a Comment