Hurley Roanne, Machado Liana
a Department of Psychology and Brain Health Research Centre , University of Otago , Dunedin , New Zealand.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2018 Oct;40(8):790-804. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2018.1434133. Epub 2018 Feb 12.
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive electrical brain stimulation technique that has been used extensively over prefrontal cortex in an effort to enhance verbal working memory (WM). However, inconsistent and contradictory outcomes from similar stimulation protocols have created a strong need to examine methodologies in greater detail. This review undertook an in-depth look at both positive and negative prefrontal tDCS-WM findings in adult populations to shed light on methodological parameters that may be driving the inconsistent outcomes in the literature.
To facilitate comprehension of the protocols employed in each study and aid between-study comparisons, we illustrated study design alongside key findings. To aid clinical translation, we reviewed separately by population (healthy young adults versus WM impaired) performance changes during stimulation (online) versus following stimulation (offline), which offers more therapeutic promise.
Our dissection of the literature highlighted design factors that are likely adding unnecessary noise and obscuring outcomes. Of note, a major blind spot in the literature relates to cognitive factors, including influential characteristics pertaining to the details of the WM test used to assess tDCS effects and participant characteristics that influence WM abilities and the organization of WM in the brain, and can impact the efficacy of tDCS-WM protocols through complex interactions.
By attending to both cognitive- and tDCS-related factors in the design phase of the study, future researchers can reduce unintended variation that may obscure positive outcomes or lead to spurious results, thereby advancing the field forward toward developing more effective tDCS-WM protocols.
经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)是一种非侵入性脑电刺激技术,已广泛应用于前额叶皮质,以增强言语工作记忆(WM)。然而,类似刺激方案产生的不一致和相互矛盾的结果,使得迫切需要更详细地研究方法。本综述深入研究了成年人群中前额叶tDCS-WM的阳性和阴性结果,以阐明可能导致文献中结果不一致的方法学参数。
为便于理解每项研究中采用的方案并有助于研究间的比较,我们在关键结果旁边展示了研究设计。为有助于临床转化,我们按人群(健康年轻成年人与工作记忆受损者)分别回顾了刺激期间(在线)与刺激后(离线)的表现变化,后者具有更大的治疗前景。
我们对文献的剖析突出了可能增加不必要干扰并模糊结果的设计因素。值得注意的是,文献中的一个主要盲点与认知因素有关,包括与用于评估tDCS效果的工作记忆测试细节相关的影响特征,以及影响工作记忆能力和大脑中工作记忆组织的参与者特征,这些因素可通过复杂的相互作用影响tDCS-WM方案的疗效。
通过在研究设计阶段关注与认知和tDCS相关的因素,未来的研究人员可以减少可能模糊阳性结果或导致虚假结果的意外变异,从而推动该领域朝着开发更有效的tDCS-WM方案前进。