Effect of anodal versus cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation on stroke rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Well then write this up as a protocol AND DISTRIBUTE it to all stroke hospitals in the world.  This is your responsibility since our fucking failures of stroke associations are DOING NOTHING FOR SURVIVORS.

Is anyone ever going to put together a protocol on using tDCS and which type?   Otherwise all this fucking research and reviews are totally worthless.  This is why we need strong stroke leadership, to actually help stroke survivors.

• HD-tDCS (3)

• cathodal tDCS (6)   

• anodal tDCS (9)  

• tDCS (61)

Effect of anodal versus cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation on stroke rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial

2013, Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
 Eman M. Khedr, MD 1, 

Ola A. Shawky, MD 1, 

Dina H. El-Hammady, MD 2, 

John C. Rothwell, MD 3, 

Essam S. Darwish, MD 1, 

Omar M. Mostafa, MD 4, 

and Amal M. Tohamy, MD 1

Abstract

Objective
We compared the long-term effect of anodal versus cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on motor recovery in patients after subacute stroke.
Methods
Forty patients with ischemic stroke undergoing rehabilitation were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: Anodal, Cathodal (over-affected and unaffected hemisphere, respectively), and Sham. Each group received tDCS at an intensity of 2 mA for 25 minutes daily for 6 consecutive days over of the motor cortex hand area. Patients were assessed with the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), Orgogozo’s MCA scale (OMCASS), the Barthel index (BI), and the Medical Research Council (MRC) muscle strength scale at baseline, after the sixth tDCS session and then 1, 2, and 3 months later. Motor cortical excitability was measured with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) at baseline and after the sixth session.
Results
By the 3-month follow-up, all groups had improved on all scales with P  values ranging from .01 to .0001. Improvement was equal in the Anodal and Cathodal groups. When these treated groups were combined and compared with Sham, significant interactions were seen for the OMCASS and BI scales of functional ability (P = .002 for each). There was increased cortical excitability of the affected hemisphere in all groups with the changes being greater in the real versus sham groups. There were borderline significant improvements in muscle strength.
Conclusion
A brief course of 2 types of tDCS stimulation is superior to sham stimulation in enhancing the effect of rehabilitation training to improve motor recovery after stroke.