A systematic review on reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with transcranial direct current stimulation

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive method of brain stimulation that has been intensively investigated in clinical and cognitive neuroscience. Although the general impression is that tDCS is a safe technique with mild and transient adverse effects (AEs), human data on sa...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology 2011-09, Vol.14 (8), p.1133-1145
Hauptverfasser: Brunoni, Andre Russowsky, Amadera, Joao, Berbel, Bruna, Volz, Magdalena Sarah, Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes, Fregni, Felipe
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1145
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1133
container_title The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology
container_volume 14
creator Brunoni, Andre Russowsky
Amadera, Joao
Berbel, Bruna
Volz, Magdalena Sarah
Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes
Fregni, Felipe
description Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive method of brain stimulation that has been intensively investigated in clinical and cognitive neuroscience. Although the general impression is that tDCS is a safe technique with mild and transient adverse effects (AEs), human data on safety and tolerability are largely provided from single-session studies in healthy volunteers. In addition the frequency of AEs and its relationship with clinical variables is unknown. With the aim of assessing tDCS safety in different conditions and study designs, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of tDCS clinical trials. We assessed Medline and other databases and reference lists from retrieved articles, searching for articles from 1998 (first trial with contemporary tDCS parameters) to August 2010. Animal studies, review articles and studies assessing other neuromodulatory techniques were excluded. According to our eligibility criteria, 209 studies (from 172 articles) were identified. One hundred and seventeen studies (56%) mentioned AEs in the report. Of these studies, 74 (63%) reported at least one AE and only eight studies quantified AEs systematically. In the subsample reporting AEs, the most common were, for active vs. sham tDCS group, itching (39.3% vs. 32.9%, p>0.05), tingling (22.2% vs. 18.3%, p>0.05), headache (14.8% vs. 16.2%, p>0.05), burning sensation (8.7% vs. 10%, p>0.05) and discomfort (10.4% vs. 13.4%, p>0.05). Meta-analytical techniques could be applied in only eight studies for itching, but no definite results could be obtained due to between-study heterogeneity and low number of studies. Our results suggested that some AEs such as itching and tingling were more frequent in the tDCS active group, although this was not statistically significant. Although results suggest that tDCS is associated with mild AEs only, we identified a selective reporting bias for reporting, assessing and publishing AEs of tDCS that hinders further conclusions. Based on our findings, we propose a revised adverse effects questionnaire to be applied in tDCS studies in order to improve systematic reporting of tDCS-related AEs.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S1461145710001690
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_879678320</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1461145710001690</cupid><sourcerecordid>2514509591</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d65bc6488ee51bee140759cca66aafb20322d5cd66ea2f9507876686715ff6fe3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1TAQhS0Eou2FB2CDLDawCXgS_2VZVYUiVWIBrCPHHhdXSXyxnVbl6XHoBSQQbOzRzDdnNHMIeQbsNTBQbz4ClwBcKGCMgezZA3JcU30jAODhjxiarX5ETnK-ZqzlopOPyVELXcs63R-Tb6c03-WCsynB0oQ3AW9pXGq0j6mE5YqaxVGTM-Y841Jo9NS4G0wZKXqPtuStGm0wBR29DeULLcks2dYnmIm6kCpE7ZrS1p5LmNepDovLE_LImynj08O_I5_fnn86u2guP7x7f3Z62VjOVWmcFKOVXGtEASMicKZEb62R0hg_1j3a1gnrpETT-l4wpZWUWioQ3kuP3Y68vNfdp_h1xVyGOWSL02QWjGsetOql0ttBduTVf8l6NS2Y7roNffEHeh3XtNQ9hp5xwVuhdYXgHrIp5pzQD_sUZpPuBmDD5uDwl4O15_lBeB1ndL86flpWge4gauYxBXeFv0f_W_Y77qmnAg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>904542588</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A systematic review on reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with transcranial direct current stimulation</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><creator>Brunoni, Andre Russowsky ; Amadera, Joao ; Berbel, Bruna ; Volz, Magdalena Sarah ; Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes ; Fregni, Felipe</creator><creatorcontrib>Brunoni, Andre Russowsky ; Amadera, Joao ; Berbel, Bruna ; Volz, Magdalena Sarah ; Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes ; Fregni, Felipe</creatorcontrib><description>Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive method of brain stimulation that has been intensively investigated in clinical and cognitive neuroscience. Although the general impression is that tDCS is a safe technique with mild and transient adverse effects (AEs), human data on safety and tolerability are largely provided from single-session studies in healthy volunteers. In addition the frequency of AEs and its relationship with clinical variables is unknown. With the aim of assessing tDCS safety in different conditions and study designs, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of tDCS clinical trials. We assessed Medline and other databases and reference lists from retrieved articles, searching for articles from 1998 (first trial with contemporary tDCS parameters) to August 2010. Animal studies, review articles and studies assessing other neuromodulatory techniques were excluded. According to our eligibility criteria, 209 studies (from 172 articles) were identified. One hundred and seventeen studies (56%) mentioned AEs in the report. Of these studies, 74 (63%) reported at least one AE and only eight studies quantified AEs systematically. In the subsample reporting AEs, the most common were, for active vs. sham tDCS group, itching (39.3% vs. 32.9%, p&gt;0.05), tingling (22.2% vs. 18.3%, p&gt;0.05), headache (14.8% vs. 16.2%, p&gt;0.05), burning sensation (8.7% vs. 10%, p&gt;0.05) and discomfort (10.4% vs. 13.4%, p&gt;0.05). Meta-analytical techniques could be applied in only eight studies for itching, but no definite results could be obtained due to between-study heterogeneity and low number of studies. Our results suggested that some AEs such as itching and tingling were more frequent in the tDCS active group, although this was not statistically significant. Although results suggest that tDCS is associated with mild AEs only, we identified a selective reporting bias for reporting, assessing and publishing AEs of tDCS that hinders further conclusions. Based on our findings, we propose a revised adverse effects questionnaire to be applied in tDCS studies in order to improve systematic reporting of tDCS-related AEs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1461-1457</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-5111</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1461145710001690</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21320389</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Bias ; Data Collection ; Deep Brain Stimulation - adverse effects ; Deep Brain Stimulation - methods ; Electric Stimulation Therapy - adverse effects ; Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Medical research ; Methods ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Skull ; Studies ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology, 2011-09, Vol.14 (8), p.1133-1145</ispartof><rights>CINP 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d65bc6488ee51bee140759cca66aafb20322d5cd66ea2f9507876686715ff6fe3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d65bc6488ee51bee140759cca66aafb20322d5cd66ea2f9507876686715ff6fe3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21320389$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Brunoni, Andre Russowsky</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amadera, Joao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berbel, Bruna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volz, Magdalena Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fregni, Felipe</creatorcontrib><title>A systematic review on reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with transcranial direct current stimulation</title><title>The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology</title><addtitle>Int J Neuropsychopharmacol</addtitle><description>Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive method of brain stimulation that has been intensively investigated in clinical and cognitive neuroscience. Although the general impression is that tDCS is a safe technique with mild and transient adverse effects (AEs), human data on safety and tolerability are largely provided from single-session studies in healthy volunteers. In addition the frequency of AEs and its relationship with clinical variables is unknown. With the aim of assessing tDCS safety in different conditions and study designs, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of tDCS clinical trials. We assessed Medline and other databases and reference lists from retrieved articles, searching for articles from 1998 (first trial with contemporary tDCS parameters) to August 2010. Animal studies, review articles and studies assessing other neuromodulatory techniques were excluded. According to our eligibility criteria, 209 studies (from 172 articles) were identified. One hundred and seventeen studies (56%) mentioned AEs in the report. Of these studies, 74 (63%) reported at least one AE and only eight studies quantified AEs systematically. In the subsample reporting AEs, the most common were, for active vs. sham tDCS group, itching (39.3% vs. 32.9%, p&gt;0.05), tingling (22.2% vs. 18.3%, p&gt;0.05), headache (14.8% vs. 16.2%, p&gt;0.05), burning sensation (8.7% vs. 10%, p&gt;0.05) and discomfort (10.4% vs. 13.4%, p&gt;0.05). Meta-analytical techniques could be applied in only eight studies for itching, but no definite results could be obtained due to between-study heterogeneity and low number of studies. Our results suggested that some AEs such as itching and tingling were more frequent in the tDCS active group, although this was not statistically significant. Although results suggest that tDCS is associated with mild AEs only, we identified a selective reporting bias for reporting, assessing and publishing AEs of tDCS that hinders further conclusions. Based on our findings, we propose a revised adverse effects questionnaire to be applied in tDCS studies in order to improve systematic reporting of tDCS-related AEs.</description><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Data Collection</subject><subject>Deep Brain Stimulation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Deep Brain Stimulation - methods</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation Therapy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Skull</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>1461-1457</issn><issn>1469-5111</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1TAQhS0Eou2FB2CDLDawCXgS_2VZVYUiVWIBrCPHHhdXSXyxnVbl6XHoBSQQbOzRzDdnNHMIeQbsNTBQbz4ClwBcKGCMgezZA3JcU30jAODhjxiarX5ETnK-ZqzlopOPyVELXcs63R-Tb6c03-WCsynB0oQ3AW9pXGq0j6mE5YqaxVGTM-Y841Jo9NS4G0wZKXqPtuStGm0wBR29DeULLcks2dYnmIm6kCpE7ZrS1p5LmNepDovLE_LImynj08O_I5_fnn86u2guP7x7f3Z62VjOVWmcFKOVXGtEASMicKZEb62R0hg_1j3a1gnrpETT-l4wpZWUWioQ3kuP3Y68vNfdp_h1xVyGOWSL02QWjGsetOql0ttBduTVf8l6NS2Y7roNffEHeh3XtNQ9hp5xwVuhdYXgHrIp5pzQD_sUZpPuBmDD5uDwl4O15_lBeB1ndL86flpWge4gauYxBXeFv0f_W_Y77qmnAg</recordid><startdate>201109</startdate><enddate>201109</enddate><creator>Brunoni, Andre Russowsky</creator><creator>Amadera, Joao</creator><creator>Berbel, Bruna</creator><creator>Volz, Magdalena Sarah</creator><creator>Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes</creator><creator>Fregni, Felipe</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201109</creationdate><title>A systematic review on reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with transcranial direct current stimulation</title><author>Brunoni, Andre Russowsky ; Amadera, Joao ; Berbel, Bruna ; Volz, Magdalena Sarah ; Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes ; Fregni, Felipe</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-d65bc6488ee51bee140759cca66aafb20322d5cd66ea2f9507876686715ff6fe3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Data Collection</topic><topic>Deep Brain Stimulation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Deep Brain Stimulation - methods</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation Therapy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Skull</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Brunoni, Andre Russowsky</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amadera, Joao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berbel, Bruna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volz, Magdalena Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fregni, Felipe</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Brunoni, Andre Russowsky</au><au>Amadera, Joao</au><au>Berbel, Bruna</au><au>Volz, Magdalena Sarah</au><au>Rizzerio, Brenno Gomes</au><au>Fregni, Felipe</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A systematic review on reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with transcranial direct current stimulation</atitle><jtitle>The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Neuropsychopharmacol</addtitle><date>2011-09</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1133</spage><epage>1145</epage><pages>1133-1145</pages><issn>1461-1457</issn><eissn>1469-5111</eissn><abstract>Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive method of brain stimulation that has been intensively investigated in clinical and cognitive neuroscience. Although the general impression is that tDCS is a safe technique with mild and transient adverse effects (AEs), human data on safety and tolerability are largely provided from single-session studies in healthy volunteers. In addition the frequency of AEs and its relationship with clinical variables is unknown. With the aim of assessing tDCS safety in different conditions and study designs, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of tDCS clinical trials. We assessed Medline and other databases and reference lists from retrieved articles, searching for articles from 1998 (first trial with contemporary tDCS parameters) to August 2010. Animal studies, review articles and studies assessing other neuromodulatory techniques were excluded. According to our eligibility criteria, 209 studies (from 172 articles) were identified. One hundred and seventeen studies (56%) mentioned AEs in the report. Of these studies, 74 (63%) reported at least one AE and only eight studies quantified AEs systematically. In the subsample reporting AEs, the most common were, for active vs. sham tDCS group, itching (39.3% vs. 32.9%, p&gt;0.05), tingling (22.2% vs. 18.3%, p&gt;0.05), headache (14.8% vs. 16.2%, p&gt;0.05), burning sensation (8.7% vs. 10%, p&gt;0.05) and discomfort (10.4% vs. 13.4%, p&gt;0.05). Meta-analytical techniques could be applied in only eight studies for itching, but no definite results could be obtained due to between-study heterogeneity and low number of studies. Our results suggested that some AEs such as itching and tingling were more frequent in the tDCS active group, although this was not statistically significant. Although results suggest that tDCS is associated with mild AEs only, we identified a selective reporting bias for reporting, assessing and publishing AEs of tDCS that hinders further conclusions. Based on our findings, we propose a revised adverse effects questionnaire to be applied in tDCS studies in order to improve systematic reporting of tDCS-related AEs.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>21320389</pmid><doi>10.1017/S1461145710001690</doi><tpages>13</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1461-1457
ispartof The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology, 2011-09, Vol.14 (8), p.1133-1145
issn 1461-1457
1469-5111
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_879678320
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Oxford Journals Open Access Collection
subjects Bias
Data Collection
Deep Brain Stimulation - adverse effects
Deep Brain Stimulation - methods
Electric Stimulation Therapy - adverse effects
Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods
Female
Humans
Male
Medical research
Methods
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Skull
Studies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Systematic review
title A systematic review on reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with transcranial direct current stimulation
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T01%3A05%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20systematic%20review%20on%20reporting%20and%20assessment%20of%20adverse%20effects%20associated%20with%20transcranial%20direct%20current%20stimulation&rft.jtitle=The%20international%20journal%20of%20neuropsychopharmacology&rft.au=Brunoni,%20Andre%20Russowsky&rft.date=2011-09&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1133&rft.epage=1145&rft.pages=1133-1145&rft.issn=1461-1457&rft.eissn=1469-5111&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1461145710001690&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2514509591%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=904542588&rft_id=info:pmid/21320389&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1461145710001690&rfr_iscdi=true