The role of transcranial direct current stimulation in diminishing the risk of pneumonia in patients with dysphagia: A double-blinded randomized clinical trial

IF 0.5 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Current Journal of Neurology Pub Date : 2023-10-09 DOI:10.18502/cjn.v22i3.13793
Sima Farpour, Majid Asadi-Shekaari, Afshin Borhani-Haghighi, Hamid Reza Farpour, Mahtab Rostamihosseinkhani
{"title":"The role of transcranial direct current stimulation in diminishing the risk of pneumonia in patients with dysphagia: A double-blinded randomized clinical trial","authors":"Sima Farpour, Majid Asadi-Shekaari, Afshin Borhani-Haghighi, Hamid Reza Farpour, Mahtab Rostamihosseinkhani","doi":"10.18502/cjn.v22i3.13793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Dysphagia can be a life-threatening issue for post-stroke patients, with aspiration pneumonia (AP) being a common risk. However, there is hope through the potential combination of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and classical behavior therapy. Our study aims to investigate the effectiveness of this combination in diminishing the risk of AP in patients with dysphagia who suffered from stroke.
 Methods: In this randomized, parallel-group, blinded clinical trial, 48 patients were allocated into the sham group (speech therapy + 30 seconds of tDCS) and the real group (speech therapy + 20 minutes of tDCS). We used the Mann Assessment of Swallowing Ability (MASA) as an assessment tool. We assessed patients at baseline, one day after treatment, and at a one-month follow-up.
 Results: Groups showed no significant difference at baseline. After treatment, the real group showed a significant difference in the severity risk of AP (P = 0.02); the same was for the follow-up (P = 0.04). The number of patients showing severe risk of AP was higher in the sham group after treatment (n = 13, 54.20%) and at follow-up (n = 4, 18.20%) than the real group (n = 4, 16.70%; n = 1, 4.50%, respectively). None of the patients reported the history of AP at any stage of assessment.
 Conclusion: Although the results were more promising in the real group than the sham group in reducing the risk of AP, both techniques can prevent AP. Therefore, we recommend early dysphagia management to prevent AP regardless of the treatment protocol.","PeriodicalId":40077,"journal":{"name":"Current Journal of Neurology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Journal of Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/cjn.v22i3.13793","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dysphagia can be a life-threatening issue for post-stroke patients, with aspiration pneumonia (AP) being a common risk. However, there is hope through the potential combination of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and classical behavior therapy. Our study aims to investigate the effectiveness of this combination in diminishing the risk of AP in patients with dysphagia who suffered from stroke. Methods: In this randomized, parallel-group, blinded clinical trial, 48 patients were allocated into the sham group (speech therapy + 30 seconds of tDCS) and the real group (speech therapy + 20 minutes of tDCS). We used the Mann Assessment of Swallowing Ability (MASA) as an assessment tool. We assessed patients at baseline, one day after treatment, and at a one-month follow-up. Results: Groups showed no significant difference at baseline. After treatment, the real group showed a significant difference in the severity risk of AP (P = 0.02); the same was for the follow-up (P = 0.04). The number of patients showing severe risk of AP was higher in the sham group after treatment (n = 13, 54.20%) and at follow-up (n = 4, 18.20%) than the real group (n = 4, 16.70%; n = 1, 4.50%, respectively). None of the patients reported the history of AP at any stage of assessment. Conclusion: Although the results were more promising in the real group than the sham group in reducing the risk of AP, both techniques can prevent AP. Therefore, we recommend early dysphagia management to prevent AP regardless of the treatment protocol.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经颅直流电刺激在降低吞咽困难患者肺炎风险中的作用:一项双盲随机临床试验
背景:吞咽困难是卒中后患者的一个威胁生命的问题,吸入性肺炎(AP)是一个常见的风险。然而,通过经颅直流电刺激(tDCS)和经典行为疗法的潜在组合,有希望。我们的研究旨在探讨这一组合在降低卒中合并吞咽困难患者发生AP的风险方面的有效性。方法:将48例患者随机、平行、盲法临床试验,分为假手术组(言语治疗+ 30秒tDCS)和真实手术组(言语治疗+ 20分钟tDCS)。我们使用Mann吞咽能力评估(MASA)作为评估工具。我们在基线、治疗后1天和1个月的随访中对患者进行评估。结果:各组在基线时无显著差异。治疗后,真实组AP严重程度风险差异有统计学意义(P = 0.02);随访时亦如此(P = 0.04)。假手术组在治疗后(n = 13, 54.20%)和随访时(n = 4, 18.20%)出现严重AP风险的患者数量均高于真实组(n = 4, 16.70%;N = 1,分别为4.50%)。在任何评估阶段均无患者报告AP病史。 结论:虽然真实组在降低AP风险方面的结果比假手术组更有希望,但这两种技术都可以预防AP。因此,我们建议无论治疗方案如何,早期处理吞咽困难以预防AP。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current Journal of Neurology
Current Journal of Neurology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
30
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sequential changes in expression of long non-coding RNAs THRIL and MALAT1 after ischemic stroke. Tinnitus and reduced word recognition with a bilateral inferior colliculus infarction after cerebellar arteriovenous malformation embolization. Validity and reliability of the Iranian-developed version of the leisure questionnaire for people with multiple sclerosis: Psychometric properties. A study on possible risk factors for progressive supranuclear palsy in southern part of India. Anticoagulation in the management of septic cavernous sinus thrombosis secondary to rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis: A retrospective real-world experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1