Balzan, P. orcid.org/0000-0002-2866-4541, Tattersall, C. and Palmer, R. orcid.org/0000-0002-2335-7104 (2022) Non-invasive brain stimulation for treating neurogenic dysarthria: a systematic review. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 65 (5). 101580. ISSN 1877-0657
Abstract
Background
Although non-invasive central and peripheral stimulations are accruing support as promising treatments in different neurological conditions, their effects on dysarthria have not been systematically investigated.
Objective
The purpose of this review was to examine the evidence base of non-invasive stimulation for treating dysarthria, identify which stimulation parameters have the most potential for treatment and determine safety risks.
Methods
A systematic review with meta-analysis, when possible, involving publications indexed in MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE CINHAL the Linguistics and Language Behavioral Abstracts, Web of Science, Cochrane Register of Control Trials and 2 trial registries was completed. Articles were searched in December 2018 and updated in June 2021 using keywords related to brain and electrical stimulation, dysarthria and research design. We included trials with randomised, cross-over or quasi-experimental designs; involving a control group; and investigating treatment of neurogenic dysarthria with non-invasive stimulation. Methodological quality was determined with the Cochrane's Risk of Bias-2 tool.
Results
In total, 6186 studies were identified; 10 studies (6 randomised controlled trials and 4 cross-over studies) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All 10 trials (268 adults with Parkinson's disease, stroke and neurodegenerative cerebellar ataxia) focused on brain stimulation (6 repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; 3 transcranial direct current stimulation; and 1 repetitive transorbital alternating current stimulation). Adjunct speech-language therapy was delivered in 2 trials. Most trials reported one or more positive effects of stimulation on dysarthria-related features; however, given the overall high risk of bias and heterogeneity in participant, trial and outcome measurement characteristics, no conclusions can be drawn. Post-treatment size effects for 2 stroke trials demonstrated no statistically significant differences between active and sham stimulation across 3 dysarthria outcomes.
Conclusions
Evidence for use of non-invasive brain stimulation in treating dysarthria remains inconclusive. Research trials that provide reliable and replicable findings are required.
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | © 2021 Elsevier Masson SAS. This is an author produced version of a paper subsequently published in Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. Article available under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
Keywords: | Systematic review; Speech disorders; Dysarthria; Electrical stimulation therapy; non-invasive brain stimulation; PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019119830 |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of Sheffield |
Academic Units: | The University of Sheffield > Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health (Sheffield) > School of Health and Related Research (Sheffield) > ScHARR - Sheffield Centre for Health and Related Research The University of Sheffield > Sheffield Teaching Hospitals |
Depositing User: | Symplectic Sheffield |
Date Deposited: | 01 Dec 2021 17:31 |
Last Modified: | 19 Nov 2022 01:13 |
Status: | Published |
Publisher: | Elsevier BV |
Refereed: | Yes |
Identification Number: | 10.1016/j.rehab.2021.101580 |
Related URLs: | |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:181111 |