Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 17, 2025
In Vivo Intracellular Recording of Type-Identified Rat Spinal Motoneurons During Trans-Spinal Direct Current Stimulation
Published on: May 11, 2020
Effect of transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation on spasticity in upper motor neuron conditions: a
Auwal B Hassan1, Abubakar T Salihu2, Mamman A Masta1
1Department of Medical Rehabilitation (Physiotherapy), Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Maiduguri, Maiduguri, Borno State, Nigeria.
Study Design:
A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.
Objectives:
To determine the effect of non-invasive transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) on spasticity, activity limitations and participation restrictions in various upper motor neuron diseases.
Methods:
Six databases including CINAHL plus, Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Web of Science were searched for the relevant records from January 2008 to December 2022. Two reviewers independently selected and extracted data on spasticity, activity limitations and participation restrictions. The risk of bias was evaluated using the PEDro scale while the GRADE approach established the certainty of the evidence.
Results:
Eleven studies were identified of which 5 (45.5%) were rated as having a low risk of bias and 8 (72.7%) were meta-analyzed. The meta-analyses did not show any significant differences between cathodal (SMD = -0.67, 95% CI = -1.50 to 0.15, P = 0.11, I2 = 75%, 6 RCTs) or anodal (SMD = 0.11, 95% CI = -0.43 to -0.64, p = 0.69, I2 = 0%, 2 RCTs) and sham tsDCS for spasticity. There was also no significant difference between active and sham tsDCS for activity limitations (SMD = -0.42, 95% CI = -0.04 to 0.21, p = 0.2, I2 = 0%, 2 RCTs) and participation restrictions (MD = -8.10, 95% CI = -18.02 to 1.82, p = 0.11, 1 RCT).
Conclusions:
The meta-analysis of the available evidence provides an uncertain estimate of the effect of cathodal tsDCS on spasticity, activity limitation and participation restriction. It might be very helpful, or it may make no difference at all. However, considering the level of the evidence and the limitation in the quality of the majority of the included studies, further well-designed research may likely change the estimate of effect.
Trial Registration:
PROSPERO CRD42021245601.
More Related Videos
13:56The Use of Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy as a Tool for the Measurement of Bi-hemispheric Transcranial Electric Stimulation Effects on Primary Motor Cortex Metabolism
Published on: November 19, 2014
14:56The Combined Use of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Robotic Therapy for the Upper Limb
Published on: September 23, 2018