A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Effects on Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) and Nociceptive Processing in Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study investigates how different transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) protocols affect pain processing in healthy individuals using quantitative sensory tests (QST).
  • It reviews 26 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and finds that while tDCS increases pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) when applied to the sensory cortex (S1) and alters cold pain thresholds (CPTs) when applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), there are no notable changes in heat pain thresholds (HPTs).
  • The conclusion highlights that specific tDCS placement can enhance certain pain thresholds and reduce evoked pain intensity, particularly in motor cortex (M1) stimulation, suggesting potential applications in pain management.

Article Abstract

Background: The aim of this study is to determine the effect that different tDCS protocols have on pain processing in healthy people, assessed using quantitative sensory tests (QST) and evoked pain intensity.

Methods: We systematically searched in EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, PEDro, PsycInfo, and Web of Science. Articles on tDCS on a healthy population and regarding QST, such as pressure pain thresholds (PPT), heat pain thresholds (HPT), cold pain threshold (CPT), or evoked pain intensity were selected. Quality was analyzed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and PEDro scale.

Results: Twenty-six RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis and sixteen in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in PPTs between tDCS and sham, but differences were observed when applying tDCS over S1 in PPTs compared to sham. Significant differences in CPTs were observed between tDCS and sham over DLPFC and differences in pain intensity were observed between tDCS and sham over M1. Non-significant effects were found for the effects of tDCS on HPTs.

Conclusion: tDCS anodic over S1 stimulation increases PPTs, while a-tDCS over DLPFC affects CPTs. The HPTs with tDCS are worse. Finally, M1 a-tDCS seems to reduce evoked pain intensity in healthy subjects.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10813344PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci14010009DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

evoked pain
12
pain intensity
12
tdcs sham
12
tdcs
10
quantitative sensory
8
processing healthy
8
healthy subjects
8
pain
8
pain thresholds
8
sham differences
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!