Suppr超能文献

经颅直流电刺激治疗亚急性失语症的随机对照试验。

Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation in Subacute Aphasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD (M.D.S., B.L.B., D.C.T., R.S., S.M.S., E.V., K.R., E.B.G., C.K., A.E.H.).

Department of Public Health Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (J.E., C.C., A.T.).

出版信息

Stroke. 2023 Apr;54(4):912-920. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.122.041557. Epub 2023 Mar 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising adjunct to therapy for chronic aphasia.

METHODS

This single-center, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled efficacy trial tested the hypothesis that anodal tDCS augments language therapy in subacute aphasia. Secondarily, we compared the effect of tDCS on discourse measures and quality of life and compared the effects on naming to previous findings in chronic stroke. Right-handed English speakers with aphasia <3 months after left hemisphere ischemic stroke were included, unless they had prior neurological or psychiatric disease or injury or were taking certain medications (34 excluded; final sample, 58). Participants were randomized 1:1, controlling for age, aphasia type, and severity, to receive 20 minutes of tDCS (1 mA) or sham-tDCS in addition to fifteen 45-minute sessions of naming treatment (plus standard care). The primary outcome variable was change in naming accuracy of untrained pictures pretreatment to 1-week posttreatment.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between the tDCS (N=30) and sham (N=28) groups: patients were 65 years old, 53% male, and 2 months from stroke onset on average. In intent-to-treat analysis, the adjusted mean change from baseline to 1-week posttreatment in picture naming was 22.3 (95% CI, 13.5-31.2) for tDCS and 18.5 (9.6-27.4) for sham and was not significantly different. Content and efficiency of picture description improved more with tDCS than sham. Groups did not differ in quality of life improvement. No patients were withdrawn due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

tDCS did not improve recovery of picture naming but did improve recovery of discourse. Discourse skills are critical to participation. Future research should examine tDCS in a larger sample with richer functional outcomes.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT02674490.

摘要

背景

经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)是一种有前途的慢性失语症治疗辅助手段。

方法

本单中心、随机、双盲、假刺激对照疗效试验检验了假设,即阳极 tDCS 增强亚急性失语症的语言治疗。其次,我们比较了 tDCS 对话语测量和生活质量的影响,并将其对命名的影响与慢性中风的先前发现进行了比较。纳入了右利手、左半球缺血性中风后 <3 个月且无先前神经或精神疾病或损伤或正在服用某些药物的失语症患者(34 例被排除;最终样本为 58 例)。参与者按年龄、失语症类型和严重程度 1:1 随机分组,接受 20 分钟 tDCS(1 mA)或假刺激 tDCS,外加 15 次 45 分钟的命名治疗(加标准护理)。主要结局变量是治疗前未训练图片命名准确性的变化,至治疗后 1 周。

结果

tDCS(N=30)和假刺激(N=28)组的基线特征相似:患者年龄 65 岁,53%为男性,平均发病后 2 个月。意向性治疗分析中,tDCS 组和假刺激组从基线到治疗后 1 周的图片命名平均调整后变化分别为 22.3(95%CI,13.5-31.2)和 18.5(9.6-27.4),差异无统计学意义。tDCS 组比假刺激组的图片描述内容和效率改善更多。两组在生活质量改善方面无差异。没有患者因不良事件退出。

结论

tDCS 并未改善图片命名的恢复,但确实改善了话语的恢复。话语技能对参与至关重要。未来的研究应在更大的样本量和更丰富的功能结局中检验 tDCS。

注册

网址:https://www.

临床试验

gov;独特标识符:NCT02674490。

相似文献

10
White Matter Hyperintensities as a Predictor of Aphasia Recovery.脑白质高信号对失语症恢复的预测作用。
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2024 Jun;105(6):1089-1098. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2024.01.008. Epub 2024 Jan 26.

引用本文的文献

1
Measuring severe stroke: a scoping review of RCTs.测量严重中风:随机对照试验的范围综述
Front Neurol. 2025 Jul 30;16:1631275. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1631275. eCollection 2025.
9
Advances in Stroke Neurorehabilitation.中风神经康复的进展
J Clin Med. 2023 Oct 25;12(21):6734. doi: 10.3390/jcm12216734.

本文引用的文献

4
Current Approaches to the Treatment of Post-Stroke Aphasia.中风后失语症的当前治疗方法。
J Stroke. 2021 May;23(2):183-201. doi: 10.5853/jos.2020.05015. Epub 2021 May 31.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验