| Autor: |
Francisco Gurdiel-Álvarez, Yeray González-Zamorano, Sergio Lerma-Lara, Julio Gómez-Soriano, Juan Luis Sánchez-González, Josué Fernández-Carnero, Víctor Navarro-López |
| Jazyk: |
angličtina |
| Rok vydání: |
2023 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Brain Sciences, Vol 14, Iss 1, p 9 (2023) |
| Druh dokumentu: |
article |
| ISSN: |
2076-3425 |
| DOI: |
10.3390/brainsci14010009 |
| Popis: |
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. |
| Databáze: |
Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
|
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje |
K zobrazení výsledku je třeba se přihlásit.
|
