8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Balance and Gait in Stroke Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

      systematic-review

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective: Balance dysfunction after stroke often results in individuals unable to maintain normal posture, limits the recovery of gait and functional independence. We explore the short-term effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on improving balance function and gait in stroke patients.

          Methods: We systematically searched on PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for studies that explored the effects of tDCS on balance after stroke until August 2020. All involved studies used at least one measurement of balance, gait, or postural control as the outcome.

          Results: A total of 145 studies were found, of which 10 ( n = 246) met the inclusion criteria and included in our studies. The present meta-analysis showed that active tDCS have beneficial effects on timed up and go test (TUGT) [mean difference (MD): 0.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.11 to 0.58] and Functional Ambulation Category (FAC) (MD: −2.54; 95% CI: −3.93 to −1.15) in stroke patients. However, the results were not significant on the berg balance scale (BBS) (MD: −0.20; 95% CI: −1.44 to 1.04), lower extremity subscale of Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA-LE) (MD: −0.43; 95% CI: −1.70 to 0.84), 10-m walk test (10 MWT) (MD: −0.93; 95% CI: −2.68 to 0.82) and 6-min walking test (6 MWT) (MD: −2.55; 95% CI: −18.34 to 13.23).

          Conclusions: In conclusion, we revealed that tDCS might be an effective option for restoring walking independence and functional ambulation for stroke patients in our systematic review and meta-analysis.

          Systematic Review Registration: CRD42020207565.

          Related collections

          Most cited references57

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

          David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The Timed “Up & Go”: A Test of Basic Functional Mobility for Frail Elderly Persons

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).

              A group of European experts was commissioned by the European Chapter of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology to gather knowledge about the state of the art of the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) from studies published up until September 2016, regarding pain, Parkinson's disease, other movement disorders, motor stroke, poststroke aphasia, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, Alzheimer's disease, tinnitus, depression, schizophrenia, and craving/addiction. The evidence-based analysis included only studies based on repeated tDCS sessions with sham tDCS control procedure; 25 patients or more having received active treatment was required for Class I, while a lower number of 10-24 patients was accepted for Class II studies. Current evidence does not allow making any recommendation of Level A (definite efficacy) for any indication. Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for: (i) anodal tDCS of the left primary motor cortex (M1) (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in fibromyalgia; (ii) anodal tDCS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in major depressive episode without drug resistance; (iii) anodal tDCS of the right DLPFC (with left DLPFC cathode) in addiction/craving. Level C recommendation (possible efficacy) is proposed for anodal tDCS of the left M1 (or contralateral to pain side, with right orbitofrontal cathode) in chronic lower limb neuropathic pain secondary to spinal cord lesion. Conversely, Level B recommendation (probable inefficacy) is conferred on the absence of clinical effects of: (i) anodal tDCS of the left temporal cortex (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in tinnitus; (ii) anodal tDCS of the left DLPFC (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in drug-resistant major depressive episode. It remains to be clarified whether the probable or possible therapeutic effects of tDCS are clinically meaningful and how to optimally perform tDCS in a therapeutic setting. In addition, the easy management and low cost of tDCS devices allow at home use by the patient, but this might raise ethical and legal concerns with regard to potential misuse or overuse. We must be careful to avoid inappropriate applications of this technique by ensuring rigorous training of the professionals and education of the patients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Neurol
                Front Neurol
                Front. Neurol.
                Frontiers in Neurology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-2295
                25 May 2021
                2021
                : 12
                : 650925
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University , Taiyuan, China
                [2] 2First Clinical Medical College, Shanxi Medical University , Taiyuan, China
                Author notes

                Edited by: Andrea Martinuzzi, Eugenio Medea (IRCCS), Italy

                Reviewed by: Marianna Capecci, Marche Polytechnic University, Italy; Antonino Naro, Centro Neurolesi Bonino Pulejo (IRCCS), Italy

                *Correspondence: Tao Lian taolian1000@ 123456126.com

                This article was submitted to Neurorehabilitation, a section of the journal Frontiers in Neurology

                Article
                10.3389/fneur.2021.650925
                8186497
                34113308
                08447144-9b28-4990-9c71-2553a64360f8
                Copyright © 2021 Dong, Meng, Guo, Zhang, Xu, Yuan and Lian.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 12 January 2021
                : 06 April 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 1, Equations: 0, References: 58, Pages: 10, Words: 6080
                Categories
                Neurology
                Systematic Review

                Neurology
                stroke,balance,transcranial direct current stimulation,meta-analysis,gait
                Neurology
                stroke, balance, transcranial direct current stimulation, meta-analysis, gait

                Comments

                Comment on this article