4.2 Article

A comparison of the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) by number of stimulation sessions on hemispatial neglect in chronic stroke patients

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 233, Issue 1, Pages 283-289

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00221-014-4112-9

Keywords

Transcranial magnetic stimulation; Hemispatial neglect; Stroke

Categories

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government [2011-0013080]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2011-0013080] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigated the effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) applied either during one session of stimulation, or by ten sessions of low-frequency stimulation over the left parietal cortex, on hemispatial neglect in stroke patients. We enrolled 34 subjects that had experienced a stroke. All subjects received 1,200 real rTMS over the left parietal cortex at an intensity of 90 % of motor thresholds with 1 Hz. Subjects were divided into two groups. One group of subjects (n = 19) received real rTMS over the left parietal cortex in a single session of stimulation, and the other group (n = 15), underwent a total of ten sessions of daily stimulations for 2 weeks. Letter cancelation test, line bisection test, and Ota's task were administered to compare the effects of different rTMS protocols, before and after rTMS. The results showed no difference in baseline value between the single session group and the ten sessions group. Total ten sessions of low-frequency rTMS over the left parietal cortex, compared with the single session of rTMS, significantly improved hemispatial neglect in letter cancelation, line bisection, and Ota's task (P < 0.01). Finally, a total of ten sessions of low-frequency rTMS can be used in treatment by rTMS for patients suffering from hemispatial neglect after stroke.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available