Correction to: Does transcranial direct current stimulation improve functional locomotion in people with Parkinson’s disease? A systematic review and meta-analysis
In the original article [1], we mentioned that some study characteristics of the article by Dagan and colleagues [2] were unavailable. However, we realized that the authors provided the relevant information in their supplementary file. As such, we added participant characteristics (i.e., age = 68.8 ± 6.8, gender = 17 M, 3 F, PD duration = 9.0 ± 5.7, and UPDRS Part III at baseline = Total 39.7 ± 14.6) to Table 1, stimulation parameters (i.e., intensity = 3 mA, duration = 20 min, areas = 3 cm2) to Table 2, and methodological quality assessments (i.e., allocation concealment = 1 and Total score = 9) to Table 3. Based on the new information, we updated Fig. 2 with the corrected selection bias and performance bias results. Finally, we confirmed that these corrections did not change the meta-analytic findings in the original article.
Table 1
Participant characteristics
Study
Total N
Age (yrs)
Gender
PD Duration (yrs)
UPDRS Part III at Baseline
Medication
DBS Treatment
FOG Test
Alizad [42]
8
NA
Total: 3F, 5 M
NA
NA
NA
NO
NA
Benninger [43]
25
Total: 63.9 ± 8.7
Active: 4F, 9 M
Sham: 5F, 7 M
Active: 10.6 ± 7.1
Sham: 9.1 ± 3.3
Active: 22.2 ± 8.7
Sham: 17.5 ± 8.0
On
NO
Patients with severe freezing or unable to walk 10 m were excluded
Capacci [44]
7
Total: 60.9 ± 9
Total: 4F, 3 M
Total: 16.8 ± 4.0
NA
NA
NO
NA
Costa-Ribeiro [45]
22
Active: 61.1 ± 9.1;
Sham: 62.0 ± 16.7
Active: 3F, 8 M
Sham: 4F, 7 M
Active: 6.1 ± 3.8
Sham: 6.3 ± 3.7
Active: 19.0
Sham: 19.1
On
NO
FOG-Q(> 15 points) were excluded
Costa-Ribeiro [46]
22
Active: 61.1 ± 9.1
Sham: 62.0 ± 16.7
Active: 3F, 8 M
Sham: 4F, 7 M
Active: 6.1 ± 3.8
Sham: 6.3 ± 3.7
Active: 19.0 ± 4.9
Sham: 17.6 ± 5.1
On
NO
Patients were excluded when they presented severe freezing according the FOG-Q
Criminger [47]
16
Total: 68.1 ± 9.8
Total: 4F, 12 M
Total: 8.7 ± 9.8
Total: 23.4 ± 9.7
On
NO
NA
da Silva [48]
17
Active: 66.0 ± 5.0
Sham: 66.0 ± 10.0
Active: 4F, 4 M
Sham: 3F, 6 M
Active: 6.0 ± 6.0
Sham: 5.0 ± 1.0
NA
NA
NO
NA
Dagan [49]
20
Total: 68.8 ± 6.8
Total: 17 M, 3 F
Total: 9.0 ± 5.7
Total: 39.7 ± 14.6
On
NO
FOG-Q: 20.5 ± 4.9
FOG-provoking test scores: 14.2 ± 8.00
Fernández-Lago [50]
18
Total: 56.7 ± 11.6
Total: 7F, 11 M
Total: 6.2 ± 3.7
Total: 21.17 ± 11.3
On
NO
NA
Kaski [51]
16
NA
NA
NA
NA
On
NO
Patients with severe freezing were excluded
Lattari [52]
17
Total: 67.2 ± 10.0
Total: 4F, 13 M
Total: 7.1 ± 2.7
Total: 18.0 ± 99.0
On
NO
NA
Mak [53]
18
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NO
NA
Manenti [54]
10
Total: 67.1 ± 7.2
Total: 4F, 6 M
Total: 8.1 ± 3.5
Total: 13.3 ± 5.7
On
NO
NA
Schabrun [55]
16
Active: 72.0 ± 4.9
Sham: 63.0 ± 11.0
Active: 8 M
Sham: 6F, 2 M
Active: 6.9 ± 4.4
Sham: 4.6 ± 3.9
Active: 47.7 ± 7.5
Sham: 37.7 ± 9.8
On
NO
NA
Swank [56]
10
Total: 68.7 ± 10.2
Total: 2F, 8 M
Total: 7.9 ± 7.1
Total: 37.0 ± 12.9
On
NO
NA
Valentino [57]
10
Total: 72.3 ± 3.6
Total: 5F, 5 M
Total: 11.0 ± 4.9
Total: 32.0 ± 10.3
On
NO
FOG-Q: 15.3 ± 2.7
Verheyden [58]
20
NA
NA
Total: 9.0 ± 4.0
Total: 16.0 ± 5.0
On
NO
NA
Yotnuengnit [59]
53
Active: 68.2 ± 9.8
Sham: 62.7 ± 8.8
Active: 6F, 11 M
Sham: 6F, 12 M
Active: 9.4 ± 5.3
Sham: 6.6 ± 3.6
Active: 11.9 ± 4.7
Sham: 11.2 ± 4.0
On
NO
NA
Note: Data for age and PD duration are mean ± standard deviation
Abbreviations: Active active tDCS protocols, DBS deep brain stimulation, F female, FOG Freezing of gait, FOG-Q Freezing of gait questionnaire, M male, NA not applicable, PD Duration time since PD diagnosis, UPDRS the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale
Table 2
tDCS protocols
Study
Treatment
Session #
Active tDCS
Stimulation Site
Stimulation Parameters
(Intensity, Duration, Areas)
Follow-Up Test
Alizad [42]
tDCS
3
A
M: Bi PMC & M1
1 mA, 20 min, 40 cm2
No
Benninger [43]
tDCS
8
A
M: Bi PFC, PMC, & M1 (separately)
2 mA, 20 min, 24.5 cm2
Yes (12wks)
Capacci [44]
tDCS
1
A
M: Bi PFC (separately)
2 mA, 20 min, NA
No
Costa-Ribeiro [45]
tDCS>
10
A
S: Central leg areas M1 (2 cm anterior to the vertex)
2 mA, 13 min, NA
Yes (4wks)
Costa-Ribeiro [46]
tDCS>
10
A
S: Central leg areas M1 (2 cm anterior to the vertex)
2 mA, 13 min, 35 cm2
Yes (4wks)
Criminger [47]
tDCS
3
A&C
M: Bi DLPFC (A-tDCS on LH & C-tDCS on RH)
2 mA, 20 min, 15 cm2
No
da Silva [48]
tDCS
1
A
S: Central leg areas M1 & SMA
2 mA, 15 min, 35 cm2
No
Dagan [49]
tDCS
2
A
M: M1 & LH-DLPFC
3 mA, 20 min, 3 cm2
No
Fernández-Lago [50]
tDCS&TT
1
A
S: leg area M1 of AH
2 mA, 20 min, 3.5 cm2
No
Kaski [51]
tDCS&PT
1
A
S: Central leg areas M1 (10–20% anterior to the vertex)
2 mA, 15 min, 40 cm2
No
Lattari [52]
tDCS
1
A
S: LH DLPFC
2 mA, 20 min, 35 cm2
No
Mak [53]
tDCS
5
A
S: M1
NA, 20 min, NA
No
Manenti [54]
tDCS
2
A
S: RH DLPFC
2 mA, 7 min, 35 cm2
No
Schabrun [55]
tDCS>
9
A
S: LH M1
2 mA, 20 min, 35 cm2
Yes (12wks)
Swank [56]
tDCS
1
A&C
M: Bi DLPFC (A-tDCS on LH & C-tDCS on RH)
2 mA, 20 min, NA
No
Valentino [57]
tDCS
5
A
S: Central leg areas M1
2 mA, 20 min, NA
Yes (4wks)
Verheyden [58]
tDCS
1
A
S: LH M1
1 mA, 15 min, NA
No
Yotnuengnit [59]
tDCS&PT
6
A
S: Central leg areas M1
2 mA, 30 min, 35 cm2
Yes (8wks)
Abbreviations: A anodal tDCS, AH affected hemisphere, Bi bilateral, C cathodal tDCS, DLPFC dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, GT gait training, LH left hemisphere, M multiple targeted brain regions, M1 primary motor cortex, NA not applicable, PFC prefrontal cortex, PMC premotor cortex, PT physical training, RH right hemisphere, S single targeted brain region, TT treadmill training, wks weeks (retention period)
Table. 3
PEDro score for methodological quality assessment
Items
Alizad
[42]
Benninger
[43]
Capacci
[44]
Costa-Ribeiro
[45]
Costa-Ribeiro
[46]
Criminger
[47]
da Silva
[48]
Dagan
[49]
Fernandez-Lago
[50]
Kaski
[51]
Lattari
[52]
Mak
[53]
Manenti
[54]
Schabrun
[55]
Swank
[56]
Valentino
[57]
Verheyden
[58]
Yotnuengnit
[59]
1. Specific eligibility criteria
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2. Subjects random allocation
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
3. Allocation concealment
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
4. Similar groups at baseline
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
5. Blinding of all subjects
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
6. Blinding of all therapists
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7. Blinding of all assessors (at least one key outcome)
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
8. Data measurement from more than 85% of the subjects initially allocated to groups (at least one key outcome)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9. All subjects received the treatment or control condition as allocated (at least one key outcome)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10. Between-group comparisons (at least one key outcome)
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
11. Point measures and measures of variability (at least one key outcome)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
Total
4
10
5
9
9
7
9
9
6
9
10
5
8
9
6
8
7
9
Fig. 2
Cochrane risk of bias assessment. a Risk of bias summary and b Risk of bias graph
×
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Correction to: Does transcranial direct current stimulation improve functional locomotion in people with Parkinson’s disease? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Akuter Schwindel stellt oft eine diagnostische Herausforderung dar. Wie nützlich dabei eine MRT ist, hat eine Studie aus Finnland untersucht. Immerhin einer von sechs Patienten wurde mit akutem ischämischem Schlaganfall diagnostiziert.
Wenn unter einer medikamentösen Hochdrucktherapie der diastolische Blutdruck in den Keller geht, steigt das Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Ereignisse: Darauf deutet eine Sekundäranalyse der SPRINT-Studie hin.
Ist die Tau-Last noch gering, scheint der Vorteil von Lecanemab besonders groß zu sein. Und beginnen Erkrankte verzögert mit der Behandlung, erreichen sie nicht mehr die kognitive Leistung wie bei einem früheren Start. Darauf deuten neue Analysen der Phase-3-Studie Clarity AD.
Neue arznei- und zellbasierte Ansätze, Frühdiagnose mit Bewegungssensoren, Rückenmarkstimulation gegen Gehblockaden – in der Parkinsonforschung tut sich einiges. Auf dem Deutschen Parkinsonkongress ging es auch viel um technische Innovationen.
