Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
2.
J ECT ; 31(1): 57-66, 2015 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24755729

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in the treatment of chronic widespread pain. METHODS: Nineteen participants were randomized into 2 groups: one group receiving active TMS (n = 7) and another group receiving sham stimulation (n = 11) applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. During sham stimulation, subjects heard a sound similar to the sound heard by those receiving the active treatment and received an active electrical stimulus to the scalp. The stimulation protocol consisted of 15 sessions completed within a 4-week period. Blind assessments were done at baseline and after each 5 sessions followed by blind assessments at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after the last TMS sessions. The primary outcome variable was a pain measure, the Gracely Box Intensity Scale (BIRS). RESULTS: The percentage of subjects who guessed that they were receiving TMS was similar in the 2 groups. Both the TMS group and the sham group showed a statistically significant reduction in the BIRS scores from baseline during the acute phase of treatment and the follow-up phase. However, the TMS and sham groups did not differ in the change in the BIRS scores. DISCUSSION: Although some previous clinical studies and basic science studies of TMS in treating pain are promising, this study found no difference in the analgesic effect of TMS and sham stimulation. Future studies should use a sham condition that attempts to simulate the sound and sensation of the TMS stimulation. Stimulus location and other stimulus parameters should be explored in future studies.


Subject(s)
Chronic Pain/therapy , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Middle Aged , Pain Measurement , Prefrontal Cortex/physiology , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
3.
J ECT ; 30(4): 320-4, 2014 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24625717

ABSTRACT

Early studies of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) have shown no adverse effects on neuropsychological function. However, further research using higher TMS intensities as well as a greater number of TMS pulses and with larger sample sizes is needed. We studied 68 patients with major depressive disorder who were randomized to receive either 15 sessions of sham or real TMS at 110% of the estimated prefrontal cortex threshold to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Each session consisted of 32 5-second trains of 10-Hz repetitive TMS at 110% adjusted motor threshold. A total of 24,000 pulses were given. Neuropsychological function was assessed before and immediately after TMS treatment with a battery of 8 tests. Using a higher TMS intensity as well as a greater number of pulses and having a larger sample size compared with most previous studies, this study found no negative neuropsychological effects of TMS. Changes in neuropsychological function were unrelated to changes in depression.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major/psychology , Depressive Disorder, Major/therapy , Neuropsychological Tests , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/adverse effects , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/methods , Adult , Aged , Cognition , Executive Function , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Processes , Middle Aged , Prefrontal Cortex , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Psychomotor Performance , Reaction Time , Verbal Behavior , Young Adult
4.
Depress Anxiety ; 29(10): 883-90, 2012 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22689290

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A few studies have examined the durability of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) antidepressant benefit once patients remitted. This study examined the long-term durability of clinical benefit from TMS using a protocol-specified TMS taper and either continuation pharmacotherapy or naturalistic follow-up. METHODS: Patients were remitters from an acute double-blind sham-controlled trial of TMS (n = 18), or from an open-label extension in patients who did not respond to the acute trial (n = 43). Long-term durability of TMS acute effect was examined in remitters over a 12-week follow-up. Relapse, defined as 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-24) ≥20, was the primary outcome. RESULTS: Of 61 remitters in the acute trial, five entered naturalistic follow-up and 50 entered the TMS taper. Thirty-two patients completed TMS taper and 1-, 2-, and 3-month follow-up. At 3-month visit, 29 of 50 (58%) were classified as in remission (HDRS-24 ≤10), two of 50 (4%) as partial responders (30%≤ HDRS-24 reduction <50% from baseline), and one of 50 (2%) met criteria for relapse. During the entire 3-month follow-up, five of the 37 patients relapsed (relapse rate = 13.5%), but four of them regained remission by the end of the study. The average time to relapse in these five patients was 7.2 ± 3.3 weeks. Patients who relapsed had higher depression scores at 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: While one third of the sample was lost to follow-up, our results demonstrate that most patients contributing to observations experienced persistence of benefit from TMS followed by pharmacotherapy or no medication. Longer follow-up and more rigorous studies are needed to explore the true long-term durability of remission produced by TMS.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant/therapy , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/methods , Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant/psychology , Double-Blind Method , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prefrontal Cortex , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales/statistics & numerical data , Secondary Prevention , Treatment Outcome
5.
J Nerv Ment Dis ; 195(5): 378-81, 2007 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17502802

ABSTRACT

This study evaluated the change in reported pain in patients with medication-resistant major depression receiving transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) compared with sham stimulation. In this study, 68 subjects with major depression were randomized to either TMS or sham stimulation. Repetitive TMS was delivered to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at a frequency of 10 Hz in 5-second trains at 110% of the estimated prefrontal cortex threshold. The level of pain was assessed before, during, and after treatment using the Systematic Assessment for Treatment Emergent Effects (SAFTEE) item for pain in the muscles, bones, and joints. Compared with sham, TMS was associated with a significant (p < 0.05) reduction in the SAFTEE pain item during the study. The reduction in pain could not be explained by the antidepressant effects.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major/therapy , Pain Management , Prefrontal Cortex/physiology , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/methods , Adult , Aged , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Depressive Disorder, Major/physiopathology , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Drug Resistance , Functional Laterality/physiology , Humans , Middle Aged , Pain/diagnosis , Pain/physiopathology , Pain Measurement/statistics & numerical data , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Regression Analysis , Treatment Outcome
6.
Biol Psychiatry ; 59(2): 187-94, 2006 Jan 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16139808

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) as a treatment for depression has shown statistically significant effects, but the clinical significance of these effects has been questioned. METHODS: Patients with medication-resistant depression were randomized to receive 15 sessions of active or sham repetitive TMS delivered to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at 110% the estimated prefrontal cortex threshold. Each session consisted of 32 trains of 10 Hz repetitive TMS delivered in 5-second trains. The primary end point was treatment response defined as a >or=50% decrease in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score at both 1 and 2 weeks following the final repetitive TMS treatment. Remission was defined as a HDRS score < 8. RESULTS: The response rate for the TMS group was 30.6% (11/35), significantly (p = .008) greater than the 6.1% (2/33) rate in the sham group. The remission rate for the TMS group was 20% (7/35), significantly (p = .033) greater than the 3% (1/33) rate in the sham group. The HDRS scores showed a significantly (p < .002) greater decrease over time in the TMS group compared with the sham group. CONCLUSIONS: Transcranial magnetic stimulation can produce statistically and clinically significant antidepressant effects in patients with medication-resistant major depression.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major/therapy , Prefrontal Cortex/physiopathology , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation/methods , Adult , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Depressive Disorder, Major/physiopathology , Drug Resistance , Electric Stimulation Therapy , Female , Functional Laterality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...