ABSTRACT
Objective@#To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for treating non-fluent aphasia after stroke.@*Methods@#Forty-five stroke survivors with non-fluent aphasia were randomly divided into a 0.5 Hz group, a 1 Hz group and a sham group, each of 15. In addition to routine linguistic training, the three groups were given rTMS over the inferior frontal gyrus of the right hemisphere at the corresponding frequency or sham stimulation. Before as well as 5 and 10 days after the treatment, all of the subjects were evaluated using the Chinese version of the Western Aphasia Battery (WAB). The occurrence of adverse events was also observed.@*Results@#Before treatment, no significant differences were observed in the groups′ average aphasia ratio, spontaneous speech, listening comprehension, retelling and naming using the WAB. After 5 and 10 days significant increases were observed in the average WAB scores of all three groups, but the listening comprehension of the 0.5 Hz group was significantly better than that of the sham group 10 days later, as was the spontaneous speech of the 1 Hz group.@*Conclusion@#rTMS at either 1 Hz or 0.5 Hz can improve the linguistic functioning of stroke survivors with non-fluent aphasia. Both 0.5 Hz and 1 Hz rTMS are safe, but the latter is more effective.
ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation ( rTMS) for treating non-fluent aphasia after stroke. Methods Forty-five stroke survivors with non-fluent aphasia were randomly divided into a 0.5 Hz group, a 1 Hz group and a sham group, each of 15. In addition to routine lin-guistic training, the three groups were given rTMS over the inferior frontal gyrus of the right hemisphere at the corre-sponding frequency or sham stimulation. Before as well as 5 and 10 days after the treatment, all of the subjects were evaluated using the Chinese version of the Western Aphasia Battery ( WAB) . The occurrence of adverse events was al-so observed. Results Before treatment, no significant differences were observed in the groups' average aphasia rati-o, spontaneous speech, listening comprehension, retelling and naming using the WAB. After 5 and 10 days signifi-cant increases were observed in the average WAB scores of all three groups, but the listening comprehension of the 0.5 Hz group was significantly better than that of the sham group 10 days later, as was the spontaneous speech of the 1 Hz group. Conclusion rTMS at either 1 Hz or 0.5 Hz can improve the linguistic functioning of stroke survivors with non-fluent aphasia. Both 0.5 Hz and 1 Hz rTMS are safe, but the latter is more effective.