China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
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
One serious argument against this NIBS approach to neurological treatment is that we are changing the frequency spectrum only temporarily, and long-term characteristics have not yet been resolved. We know that there are neurochemical effects that accompany the changing frequency spectrum,61 and the result of the electrical and chemical change can lead to retained brain network changes, called plasticity, that result in a remembered functional process. We hypothesize that the electrical brain stimulation can train the brain to continue operating in the desired manner and that this memory effect is an adjunct of the individual motivation. We are proposing the use of electrical brain stimulation as a “brain builder” dependent on the motivation of the patient.
Home Use of tDCS
Published in L. Syd M Johnson, Karen S. Rommelfanger, The Routledge Handbook of Neuroethics, 2017
There are several possible explanations for why the home use of tDCS has not undergone broad adoption by the general population. Perhaps only a small subset of individuals is sufficiently motivated to experiment with electrical brain stimulation devices that have not undergone review by regulatory authorities. As with any novel technology, home users may represent a group of “early adopters,” and it is possible that there has not been enough time (or technological refinement) for tDCS to gain mainstream acceptance. Indeed, one study of the comments on online articles related to tDCS found that although public misunderstanding of the technology has diminished in the years following the release of the Foc.us device, there is still a significant degree of confusion surrounding tDCS (Cabrera and Reiner, 2015). In line with such thinking, people may be skeptical of either the efficacy or safety involved in home use of tDCS. It is also worth observing that while DIY movements themselves do not generally spread to the mainstream public, the commercialization of DIY techniques into consumer-friendly devices often results in greater public uptake. For example, though the quantified self movement began in mid-2008 (Swan, 2009), the commercialization of self-tracking tools (such as Fitbit and other wearable devices) has brought these technologies to the general population.
People with Disorders of Consciousness
Published in Barbara A. Wilson, Jill Winegardner, Caroline M. van Heugten, Tamara Ownsworth, Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 2017
Jitka Annen, Steven Laureys, Olivia Gosseries
Lately, interest in electrical brain stimulation to improve the patient's state has increased. Deep brain stimulation of the thalamus in one MCS patient allowed him to recover the ability to functionally communicate and use objects by increasing thalamo-cortical connectivity (Schiff et al., 2007). The results of this study are very promising, yet a big limitation is that it is invasive and not without risk (i.e. infection and haemorrhage). A non-invasive technique is transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), which establishes a stable current between two electrodes (anode and cathode) that can be placed on the scalp. Some MCS patients showed behavioural improvements after a single session as well as repetitive sessions of anodal tDCS on the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, whereas UWS patients did not show any improvement (see Figure 10.2A) (Thibaut et al., 2014; Angelakis et al., 2014). MCS responders showed more grey matter preservation and residual metabolic activity in the stimulated brain region, in the precuneus and in the thalamus, compared to non-responders (see Figure 10.2B) (Thibaut et al., 2015c). Repetitive TMS has also been used to stimulate brains of DOC patients. In two single case reports, MCS patients improved clinically after TMS on the motor cortex (Manganotti et al., 2013; Piccione et al., 2011). Similar to tDCS, UWS patients do not seem to clinically improve after repetitive TMS (Cincotta et al., 2015).
Developing a framework for utilizing adjunct rehabilitation therapies in motor recovery of upper extremity post stroke
Published in Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 2023
Robert Teasell, Amanda McIntyre, Ricardo Viana, Emma A. Bateman, Manuel Murie-Fernandez, Shannon Janzen, Marcus Saikaley
These “priming” or stimulating treatments include three subcategories Internal Brain-Stimulating Therapies include activation through the intact hemisphere (i.e. Action Observation and Mental Practice), mentally rehearsing the motor task (i.e. Mirror therapy and Bilateral Arm Training), and adding cognitive elements to improve motor recovery (i.e. Virtual Reality and Music Therapy).Repetitive Magnetic or Electrical Brain Stimulation include Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, and Theta-Burst Stimulation.Pharmacological and Biological Treatments include Central Nervous System (CNS) stimulants and Anti-Depressants.
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) effects on upper limb motor function in stroke: an overview review of the systematic reviews
Published in Brain Injury, 2023
Jaya Shanker Tedla, Devika Rani Sangadala, Ravi Shankar Reddy, Kumar Gular, Venkata Nagaraj Kakaraparthi, Faisal Asiri
Over the past century, technological advancements and their incorporation into health sciences have led to the development of safe, well-controlled, and effective stimulation devices (10). Currently, these stimulation devices are categorized as invasive, deep brain stimulation, and noninvasive, such as magnetic or electrical brain stimulation. Noninvasive brain stimulation methods have the advantage of minimizing the risk of infection that is associated with invasive brain stimulation (10). Noninvasive brain stimulation approaches include repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), transcranial alternating current stimulation, transcranial pulsed ultrasound, and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) (11). Among these, rTMS and tDCS have considerable evidence supporting their use for rehabilitating patients after stroke (12).
Current perspectives on the benefits, risks, and limitations of noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) for post-stroke dysphagia
Published in Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 2021
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was introduced in 1985 by Barker et al. [5] as a tool to investigate human cortical physiology in replacement of painful high voltage transcutaneous electrical brain stimulation. It is based on the principle of inductance to noninvasively transmit electrical energy across the scalp and skull onto the brain. By passing a brief but strong electric current through the TMS coil that is placed over the scalp, a magnetic field is generated. This field penetrates through the skull for 1.5–2 cm in depth and induces a secondary electric current onto the brain cortex [6]. Such current is strong enough to depolarize neurons, resulting in action potentials. Subsequently, this evoked descending motor volleys from the cortex to peripheral muscles along the corticospinal or corticobulbar tracts. When TMS is applied over the primary motor cortex at an intensity above motor threshold, responses (motor evoked potentials; MEPs) from the muscles can be recorded as electromyography (EMG) signals in contact electrodes. The amplitude and latency of MEP are examples of measures that reflect cortical excitability [7]. This procedure is useful for cortical mapping. Of relevance to swallowing, Hamdy et al. [8] demonstrated that the human mylohyoid and pharyngeal and esophageal musculatures are represented discretely and somatotopically in the motor cortex and asymmetrically between hemispheres. Importantly, a later study found that, in a group of stroke patients who recovered from dysphagia, the functional recovery was associated with an increase in cortical representation of the intact hemisphere [9]. This finding highlights the importance of reorganization of the intact neural network in the recovery of post-stroke dysphagia.