China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Physical and Cognitive Rehabilitation for Children with Brain and Spinal Tumors
Published in David A. Walker, Giorgio Perilongo, Roger E. Taylor, Ian F. Pollack, Brain and Spinal Tumors of Childhood, 2020
Alexandra M. Gaynor, Helen Hartley, Stephen A. Sands
There is a growing interest in the application of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques to clinical populations suffering from chronic pain, motor difficulties, and cognitive impairments. The majority of research testing the feasibility and efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation in populations with neurological disorders has focused on the utility of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in management of pain and fatigue.170–172 However, a recent study showed that tDCS to the prefrontal cortex improved sustained attention in a cohort of 16 breast cancer survivors compared to sham stimulation, providing promise for the use of this stimulation method in treating neurocognitive difficulties in pediatric brain tumor survivors as well.173 Furthermore, research from other patient populations suggests combining tDCS with training interventions may enhance cognitive outcomes, including working memory ability, attention, and executive functioning, as compared to cognitive training alone.174,175 Although results from other clinical populations are promising, research is needed to establish the efficacy and feasibility of utilizing neuromodulation techniques in pediatric cancer survivors, as well as the optimal combination of stimulation modality and cognitive training to remediate cognitive dysfunction in this population.
Electrical Brain Stimulation to Treat Neurological Disorders
Published in Bahman Zohuri, Patrick J. McDaniel, Electrical Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Neurological Disorders, 2019
Bahman Zohuri, Patrick J. McDaniel
Brain stimulation therapies can play a role in treating certain mental disorders. Brain stimulation therapies involve activating or inhibiting the brain directly with electricity. The electricity can be given directly by electrodes implanted in the brain, or noninvasively through electrodes placed on the scalp. The electricity can also be induced by using magnetic fields applied to the head. While these types of therapies are less frequently used than medication and psychotherapies, they hold promise for treating certain mental disorders that do not respond to other treatments.
The Mesocorticolimbic Circuit in Drug Dependence and Reward — a Role for the Extended Amygdala?
Published in Peter W. Kalivas, Charles D. Barnes, Limbic Motor Circuits and Neuropsychiatry, 2019
George F. Koob, Patricia Robledo, Athina Markou, S. Barak Caine
Because of problems of measurement and interpretation with absolute rates of responding for ICSS, alternative procedures have been developed to directly evaluate thresholds for brain stimulation.2,8,9 Here, rats are systematically subjected to ascending or descending series of rate/intensity functions where stimulation current intensity values are increased or decreased. Alternatively, the rats are subjected to rate/frequency functions where stimulation frequency values are increased or decreased. A sigmoidal function results whose slope increases as the low threshold areas of midbrain/lateral hypothalamus are approached. It has been suggested that shifts of this function to the right or left, without changes in the maximal rate of responding, reflect changes in threshold for rewarding brain stimulation. Using rate/intensity and rate/frequency functions, administration of psychomotor stimulants, such as amphetamine and cocaine, results in a shift to the left of such functions.10,11 Similar effects have been observed using rate-independent measures of reward that involve discrete trial procedures and variation of the stimulation intensity according to a psychophysical procedure.12 Amphetamine and cocaine also reduce reward threshold in this type of rate-free measure of reward threshold12,13 (see Figure 1).
The efficacy of neurofeedback for alcohol use disorders – a systematic review
Published in The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry, 2023
Alcoholism is one of the primary causes of morbidity and mortality across the world. AUD treatment options are still limited in terms of efficacy and accessibility. Treatments for AUD, both pharmacological and cognitive behavioural have had varying degrees of success to far. Several recent studies have suggested that non-invasive brain stimulation methods might be useful in the treatment of addiction problems (Naish et al. 2018). There has been a surge in interest in using brain stimulation to treat AUDs in this context (Lapenta et al. 2018). Researchers have been able to better understand brain systems associated with addiction, such as those involved in positive and negative reinforcement, decision making and cognitive control, due to better neuroimaging methods. Neuropsychological therapies, such as EEG-NF training, real-time functional magnetic resonance imaging NF, tDCS, TMS, DBS and electroconvulsive therapy, which aim to reverse the neuroplastic alterations caused by chronic alcohol consumption, are desperately needed (Salling and Martinez 2016).
Treatment approaches for pusher behaviour: a scoping review
Published in Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 2023
Matteo Paci, Gabriele Macchioni, Francesco Ferrarello
Included studies showed promising results for the use of somatosensory cues, especially through robot-assisted gait training (supported by three RCTs) and visual-somatosensory integration (supported by two RCTs and one CCT). It should be noted that somatosensory cues and visual-somatosensory integration were the first two treatment approaches conceived, and published starting in year 1998 and 2004, respectively (Figure 3). Further investigation is needed on treatment approaches based on brain stimulation and how it could be integrated with other promising treatments. On the contrary, controlled studies suggest that approaches based on visual feedback are less effective than others. Suggestions from our findings are not consistent with the conclusions of Luque-Moreno et al.23: it should be noted that they did not consider two RCTs51,53 and all the CCTs and founded their conclusions on one pilot RCT. In addition, the issues of interdisciplinary approach and intensive intervention are not key features of the studies, which they examined. The suggestions derived from our findings should be confirmed by a methodologically sound systematic review.
Combination of noninvasive brain stimulation and constraint-induced movement therapy in patients with stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 2023
Auwal Abdullahi, Thomson WL Wong, Tamaya Van Criekinge, Shamay SM Ng
Although the level of evidence from the results of this study seems to be good, caution needs to be exercised in interpreting the results. This is due to the significant heterogeneity between the included studies, especially with regard to the sample size and time since stroke [58]. Similarly, it has been argued that the potential effects of brain stimulation depend on many factors, such as the assessment tools used, individual patients’ neuroanatomical and neurophysiological differences, and the type of additional therapy used [58,64]. However, it has been argued that the intensity of stimulation does not necessarily affect outcome [65]. Thus, it is important clinicians and researchers consider these factors during practice and research involving a combination of NIBS with CIMT in patients with stroke.