Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2026
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation tDCS of Wernicke's and Broca's Areas in Studies of Language Learning and Word Acquisition
Published on: July 13, 2019
Noninvasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) Techniques Application in Voice Disorders: A Systematic Review
Seyyedeh Samaneh Mirahadi1, Mohammad Taha Rostami1
1Department of Speech and Language Pathology, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Background:
Voice disorders substantially compromise communication ability, occupational performance, and overall quality of life. Although behavioral and surgical interventions constitute the current standards of care, their effectiveness is often inconsistent, particularly in complex or treatment-resistant conditions. In recent years, noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) modalities (such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation) have emerged as promising adjunctive approaches aimed at enhancing neuroplasticity and modulating cortical excitability within voice-related neural circuits.
Objective:
This systematic review aimed to synthesize and critically evaluate the existing evidence concerning the therapeutic efficacy of NIBS in the management of voice disorders.
Methods:
Adhering to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses 2020 framework, a comprehensive literature search was performed across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar through May 2025. Eligible studies included any NIBS intervention applied to participants with clinically diagnosed voice disorders. Methodological quality and evidence levels were appraised using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and National Health and Medical Research Council assessment tools.
Results:
Eight studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, encompassing randomized controlled trials, open-label investigations, and single-case reports. Collectively, the findings revealed preliminary yet encouraging improvements in acoustic, perceptual, and self-reported vocal outcomes, particularly when stimulation targeted the primary motor or sensorimotor cortices. Nonetheless, notable heterogeneity, limited sample sizes, and incomplete blinding contributed to a low overall certainty of evidence.
Conclusion:
While current evidence indicates potential therapeutic value of NIBS for specific voice disorders, robust, large-scale randomized trials incorporating neuroimaging and extended follow-up are essential to refine stimulation protocols and establish clinical effectiveness.
