Table 2B.
Clinical scales scores.
| Study | FMS (SD) | MAL (SD) | B&B (n ≥ 3) | SIS (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ang et al., 2015 Baseline | Group A real tDCS: 35.3 ± 7.8 Group B sham tDCS: 32.6 ± 8.1 |
– | – | – |
| Average improvement between post intervention and baseline*** | Group A real tDCS: 0.9 ± 3.0 Group B sham tDCS: 2.8 ± 4.0 |
– | – | – |
| Triccas et al., 2015 Baseline | Group A real tDCS: 24.91 ± 16.01 Group B sham tDCS: 37.09 ± 13.57 |
– | – | – |
| Post treatment**** | Group A real tDCS: 33.64 ± 16.25 Group B sham tDCS: 44.82 ± 16.29 |
– | – | – |
| Powell et al., 2016 Baseline | Group A tDCS pre-PNS: 23.3 ± 15.8 Group B tDCS post-PNS: 18.7 ± 8.1 |
– | – | Group A tDCS pre-PNS: 65.3 ± 5.1 Group B tDCS post-PNS: 60.0 ± 9.7 |
| Average improvement between post intervention and baseline***** | Group A tDCS pre-PNS: 1.5 ± 1.39 Group B tDCS post-PNS: 0.17 ± 1.3 |
– | – | Group tDCS pre-PNS: 6.33 ± 2.21 Group B tDCS post-PNS: 0.50 ± 1.56 |
| Straudi et al., 2016 Baseline | Group A real anodal/cathodal tDCS: 24.08 ± 16.60 Group B sham anodal/cathodal tDCS: 21.09 ± 13.19 |
Group A real tDCS (a+c) AOM: 0.68 ± 0.90 Real tDCS (a+c) QOM: 0.69 ± 1.01 Group B sham tDCS (a+c) AOM: 0.59 ± 1.02 Sham tDCS (a+c) QOM: 0.59 ± 1.17 |
Group A real anodal/cathodal tDCS: 10.42 ± 15.47 Group B sham anodal/cathodal tDCS: 6.55 ± 11.67 |
– |
| Post treatment****** | Group A real anodal/cathodal tDCS: 28.50 ± 18.96****** Group B sham anodal/cathodal tDCS: 26.64 ± 16.12****** |
Group A real tDCS (a+c) AOM: 1.09 ± 1.36§ Real tDCS (a+c) QOM: 1.05 ± 1.43§ Group B sham tDCS (a+c) AOM: 0.89 ± 1.38 Sham tDCS (a+c) QOM: 0.85 ± 1.50 |
Group A real anodal/cathodal tDCS: 12.67 ± 17.23§ Group B sham anodal/cathodal tDCS: 8.55 ± 14.07 |
– |
tDCS, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation; RT, Robotic Training; FMS, Fugl-Meyer Score; B&B, Box and Block; MAL, Motor Activity Log; MI, Motricity Index; CM, Chedoke Mc-Master Scale; UE, upper limb; AOM, Amount of Movement; QOM, Quality of Movement; SD, Standard Deviation.
Significant difference occurred in FMS (UE) and MI assessed between baseline and post treatment, p < 0.05 in both groups; however, no significant difference between groups have been retrieved.
Significant difference occurred in FMS assessed between baseline and post treatment, p < 0.001 in both groups; however, no significant difference between groups have been retrieved.
No significant difference occurred in FMS assessed between baseline and post treatment in both groups (p = 0.31 pre-PNS and p = 0.67 post-PNS); significant difference occurred for the SIS in the tDCS pre-PNS group (p = 0.02). However, no significant difference between groups have been retrieved for both FMS and SIS p = 0.59 and p = 0.07, respectively.
Significant interaction effect (p < 0.01) of treatment (real and sham-tDCS) and stroke location (subcortical and cortical).
A significant interaction effect (p < 0.05) was detected regarding stroke duration (subacute vs. chronic) and type (cortical vs. subcortical).