Table 2A.
Clinical scales scores.
| Study | FMS (SD) | BI (SD) | MAS (SD) | MAL (SD) | MRC (SD) | B&B (n = 3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hesse et al., 2007 Baseline | 7.2 ± 3.1 | – | – | – | 3.0 ± 3.1 | – |
| Post-treatment* | 18.2 ± 17.2 | – | – | – | 7.6 ± 6.9 | – |
| Hesse et al., 2011 Baseline | Group A tDCS(a): 7.81 ± 3.8 Group B tDCS(c): 7.9 ± 3.4 Group C tDCS(s): 8.2 ± 4.4 |
Group A tDCS(a): 34.1 ± 3.4 Group B tDCS(c):34.2 ± 7.6 Group C tDCS(s): 35.0 ± 7.8 |
Group A tDCS(a):1.6 ± 2.9 Group B tDCS(c):1.0 ± 1.8 Group C tDCS(s):1.4 ± 2.7 |
– | Group A tDCS(a): 3.5 ± 3.6 Group B tDCS(c):2.9 ± 3.4 Group C tDCS(s):3.4 ± 3.2 |
Group A tDCS(a): 0 Group B tDCS(c): 0 Group C tDCS(s): 0 |
| Post treatment** | Group A tDCS(a): 19.1 ± 14.4 Group B tDCS(c): 18.9 ± 10.5 Group C tDCS(s):19.2 ± 15.0 |
Group A tDCS(a): 53.6 ± 14.5 Group B tDCS(c) 59.2 ± 12.4 Group C tDCS(s) 56.3 ± 15.5 |
Group A tDCS(a): 3.3 ± 3.6 Group B tDCS(c):3.5 ± 4.9 Group C tDCS(s):3.5 ± 4.0 |
Group A tDCS(a): 11.9 ± 12.5 Group B tDCS(c): 13.7 ± 10.4 Group C tDCS(s): 12.8 ± 12.1 |
Group A tDCS(a): 9 Group B tDCS(c): 8 Group C tDCS(s): 9 |
|
| Ochi et al., 2013 Baseline | Group A tDCS(a): 23.2 ± 16.6 Group B tDCS(c): 23.6 ± 16.7 |
– | Group A tDCS(a): (E) 2.4 ± 1.1 (W) 3.0 ± 1.1; (F) 2.8 ± 1.3 Group B tDCS(c): (E) 2.5 ± 1.2 (W) 2.9 ± 1.1; (F) 2.9 ± 1.2 |
Group A tDCS(a): 1.6 ± 2.7 Group B tDCS(c): 1.6 ± 2.8 |
– | – |
| Post treatment*** | Group A tDCS(a): 23.2 ± 16.6 Group B tDCS(c): 23.6 ± 16.7 |
– | Group A tDCS(a): (E) 2.4 ± 1.1 (W) 3.0 ± 1.1; (F) 2.8 ± 1.3 † Group B tDCS(c): (E) 2.5 ± 1.2 (W) 2.9 ± 1.1; (F) 2.9 ± 1.2 † |
Group A tDCS(a): 1.6 ± 2.7 Group B tDCS(c): 1.6 ± 2.8 |
– | – |
tDCS, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation; RT, Robotic Training; FMS, Fugl-Meyer Score; MAS, Modified Ashworth Scale; BI, Barthel Index; B&B, Box and Block; MRC, Medical Research Council; MAL, Motor Activity Log; E, elbow; W, wrist; F, finger; SD, Standard Deviation.
Significant difference occurred in FMS and MRC assessed between baseline and post treatment, p = 0.018 and p = 0.027, respectively.
No between group differences occurred for all clinical indicators used (p > 0.025). Significant difference (p = 0.014) only occurred within the cathodal group (TACI+LACI vs. LACI) in terms of ΔFMS (not directly reported in Table 2A).
Small but significant improvements (p < 0.05) between pre/post treatment, have been observed for both stimulation protocol in FMS and MAS (not in MAL, p > 0.05).
Between stimulation condition, i.e., tDCS(a) and tDCS(c), only for tDCS(c)+RT a significant improvement in MAS for the fingers has been observed.