4.6 Article

Reducing procedural pain and discomfort associated with transcranial direct current stimulation

期刊

BRAIN STIMULATION
卷 4, 期 1, 页码 38-42

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2010.05.002

关键词

anode; cathode; EMLA; pain reduction; transcranial direct current stimulation; tDCS

资金

  1. Medical University of South Carolina College of Graduate Studies
  2. National Institutes of Health (National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes), the Department of Defense and Veterans Administration
  3. National Institutes of Health (National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institute of Nursing Research)
  4. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [K23NS050485] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) appears to have modulatory effects on the excitability of cortical brain tissue. Though tDCS as presently applied causes no apparent harm to brain structure or function, a number of uncomfortable sensations can occur beneath the electrodes during stimulation, including tingling, pain, itching, and burning sensations. Therefore, we investigated the effect of topically applied Eutectic mixture of local anesthetics (EMLA) on tDCS-related discomfort. Methods Nine healthy adults received both anodal and cathodal 2.0 mA tDCS for 5 minutes over the prefrontal cortex with the skin pretreated for 20 minutes with either EMLA or placebo cream. Participants rated procedural discomfort six times across eight dimensions of sensation. Results On average, the mean sensation ratings for EMLA-associated tDCS stimulation were significantly lower than placebo-associated stimulation for every cutaneous sensation evaluated. Cathodal stimulation was associated with higher ratings of sharpness and intolerability than anodal stimulation. Conclusions Topical EMLA may reduce tDCS-related discomfort. (C) 2011 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