Background: Different transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) paradigms have been implemented to treat poststroke spasticity, but discordant results have been reported.
Objective: This study aimed to determine the efficacy and persistence of dual tDCS (anode over affected motor cortex [M1] and cathode over contralateral M1) compared with cathodal tDCS (cathode over contralateral M1) on upper limb (UL) functional, behavioral, and neurophysiological measures in chronic poststroke individuals.
Subjects and methods: Ten subjects with UL spasticity (7 men; mean 62 years; 8 ischemic stroke; years from event: 2.3 years) were enrolled in a cross-over, double-blinded study. Cathodal and dual tDCS, both preceded by 1 week of sham stimulation 1 month before real stimulation, were applied with 3 months interval. Stimulating paradigm was 20 minutes for five consecutive days in each block. Evaluations were performed before (T1), after real or sham treatment (T2), and after 1 (T3), 4 (T4), and 8 weeks (T5). Functional, behavioral, and neurophysiological tests were performed at each time.
Results: Both tDCS paradigms decreased spasticity, increased strength, and ameliorated behavioral scales. Cathodal tDCS was superior to dual tDCS in reducing UL distal spasticity immediately after treatment (T2: cathodal > dual: P = .023) and provided a higher and longer lasting reduction at proximal districts (T3: cathodal > dual: P = .042; T4: cathodal > dual: P = .028; T5: cathodal > dual: P = .05). These findings are supported by an H-reflex modulation (overall time effect P > .002).
Conclusions: Cathodal tDCS is slightly more effective than dual tDCS in reducing distal UL spasticity in chronic poststroke subjects. A modulation of spinal inhibitory mechanisms, demonstrated by H-reflex modifications, supports this finding.
Keywords: Hemispheric imbalance; ischemic stroke; motor rehabilitation; non-invasive brain stimulation.
Copyright © 2016 National Stroke Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.