Speyer Renée, Sutt Anna-Liisa, Bergström Liza, Hamdy Shaheen, Pommée Timothy, Balaguer Mathieu, Kaale Anett, Cordier Reinie
Department Special Needs Education, University of Oslo, 0318 Oslo, Norway.
Curtin School of Allied Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
J Clin Med. 2022 Feb 14;11(4):993. doi: 10.3390/jcm11040993.
To assess the effects of brain neurostimulation (i.e., repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation [rTMS] and transcranial direct current stimulation [tDCS]) in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD). Systematic literature searches were conducted in four electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed) to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only. Using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2), the methodological quality of included studies was evaluated, after which meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model. In total, 24 studies reporting on brain neurostimulation were included: 11 studies on rTMS, 9 studies on tDCS, and 4 studies on combined neurostimulation interventions. Overall, within-group meta-analysis and between-group analysis for rTMS identified significant large and small effects in favour of stimulation, respectively. For tDCS, overall within-group analysis and between-group analysis identified significant large and moderate effects in favour of stimulation, respectively. Both rTMS and tDCS show promising effects in people with oropharyngeal dysphagia. However, comparisons between studies were challenging due to high heterogeneity in stimulation protocols and experimental parameters, potential moderators, and inconsistent methodological reporting. Generalisations of meta-analyses need to be interpreted with care. Future research should include large RCTs using standard protocols and reporting guidelines as achieved by international consensus.
评估脑神经刺激(即重复经颅磁刺激[rTMS]和经颅直流电刺激[tDCS])对口咽吞咽困难(OD)患者的影响。仅在四个电子数据库(CINAHL、Embase、PsycINFO和PubMed)中进行系统的文献检索,以检索随机对照试验(RCT)。使用修订后的Cochrane随机试验偏倚风险工具(RoB 2)评估纳入研究的方法学质量,之后使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。总共纳入了24项关于脑神经刺激的研究:11项关于rTMS的研究、9项关于tDCS的研究以及4项关于联合神经刺激干预的研究。总体而言,rTMS的组内荟萃分析和组间分析分别确定了有利于刺激的显著大效应和小效应。对于tDCS,总体组内分析和组间分析分别确定了有利于刺激的显著大效应和中等效应。rTMS和tDCS在口咽吞咽困难患者中均显示出有前景的效果。然而,由于刺激方案和实验参数、潜在调节因素以及方法学报告不一致导致的高度异质性,研究之间的比较具有挑战性。荟萃分析的结果需要谨慎解释。未来的研究应包括使用国际共识达成的标准方案和报告指南的大型RCT。