Skip to main content
. 2019 May 7;9(6):e01284. doi: 10.1002/brb3.1284

Table 8.

Therapeutic use of TMS in specific phobia

Study Double‐blind (Y/N) Randomized (Y/N) Mean age/SD (years) Active sample (n) Sham sample (n) Number of sessions Target Frequency MT (%) Total pulses Drop outs Results Task Follow‐up Target identification method Coil
Active Sham
Herrmann et al. (2017) Y Y Active group 43.2 ± 12.6
Sham group 46.6 ± 13.7
Acrophobia:
20
Acrophobia: 19 2 sessions with an inter session interval of 1 week vmPFC 10 Hz 100% RMT 3,120 1
(reasons not reported)
2
(reasons not reported)
Active > sham for anxiety (p < 0.05) and avoidance ratings (p < 0.05) Height scenario virtual reality 3 months MNI coordinates
based on mPFC activation
Round MMC−140 Parabolic or MC‐p‐B70 placebo
Notzon et al. (2015) Single‐blind Y 26.46 ± 8.47 Spider phobia: 21
HC: 19
Spider phobia: 20
HC: 23
1 left DLPFC Standard iTBS 80% RMT 600 (iTBS) not reported not reported No iTBS effect in acute anxiety or disgust Virtual reality provoked anxiety No F3 EEG 10–20 Not reported

DLPFC = dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; EEG = electroencephalogram; FSQ = fear of spiders questionnaire; HC = health controls; iTBS = intermittent theta burst stimulation; mPFC = medial prefrontal cortex; MT = motor threshold; RMT = resting motor threshold; SD: standard deviation; SPQ = Spider phobia questionnaire; vmPFC = ventromedial prefrontal cortex; Y = yes.