4.6 Article

A Negative Pilot Study of Daily Bimodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Schizophrenia

期刊

BRAIN STIMULATION
卷 7, 期 6, 页码 813-816

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2014.08.002

关键词

Repetitive transcranial direct current stimulation; Schizophrenia; Auditory hallucinations; Negative symptoms; Prefrontal cortex

资金

  1. NHMRC practitioner fellowship
  2. Cervel Neurotech
  3. Sepracor Inc
  4. AstraZeneca
  5. Ontario Mental Health Foundation
  6. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  7. Brain and Behaviour Research Foundation
  8. Temerty Family and Grant Family
  9. Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) Foundation
  10. Campbell Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: A small number of studies conducted to date have suggested that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied to the temporoparietal cortex may reduce auditory hallucinations in patients with schizophrenia. Prefrontal brain stimulation with other methods, has also been shown to potentially improve the negative symptoms of this disorder. Objective: To investigate the therapeutic potential of daily bimodal tDCS: anodal stimulation to the prefrontal cortex and cathodal stimulation to the temporoparietal junction in patients with persistent hallucinations and negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Methods: We conducted two small randomized double-blind controlled trials comparing bimodal tDCS to sham stimulation. In one study, stimulation was provided unilaterally, in the second study it was provided bilaterally. Results: Neither unilateral nor bilateral tDCS resulted in a substantial change in either hallucinations or negative symptoms. Stimulation was well tolerated without side-effects. Conclusion: Daily tDCS does not appear to have substantial potential in the treatment of hallucinations or negative symptoms and further research should investigate higher doses of stimulation or more frequently applied treatment schedules. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据