Does non-invasive brain stimulation modify hand dexterity? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

[en] Introduction: Dexterity is described as coordinated hand and finger movement for precision tasks. It is essential for day-to-day activities like computer use, writing or buttoning a shirt. Integrity of brain motor networks is crucial to properly execute these fine hand tasks. When these networks are damaged, interventions to enhance recovery are frequently accompanied by unwanted side effects or limited in their effect. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) are postulated to target affected motor areas and improve hand motor function with few side effects. However, the results across studies vary, and the current literature does not allow us to draw clear conclusions on the use of NIBS to promote hand function recovery. Therefore, we developed a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of different NIBS technologies on dexterity in diverse populations. This study will potentially help future evidence-based research and guidelines that use these NIBS technologies for recovering hand dexterity. Methods and analysis: This protocol will compare the effects of active versus sham NIBS on precise hand activity. Records will be obtained by searching relevant databases. Included articles will be randomised clinical trials in adults, testing the therapeutic effects of NIBS on continuous dexterity data. Records will be studied for risk of bias. Narrative and quantitative synthesis will be done. Ethics and dissemination: No private health information is included; the study is not interventional. Ethical approval is not required. The results will be reported in a peer-review journal. © 2017 Article author(s). All rights reserved.

Disciplines :

Neurology

Author, co-author :

O'Brien, A. T.; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA, United States

Acosta, G. T.; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA, United States

Huerta, R.; Department of Medicine, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Coyoacan, Mexico

Thibaut, Aurore ; Université de Liège - ULiège > GIGA : Coma Group

Language :

English

Title :

Does non-invasive brain stimulation modify hand dexterity? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Publication date :

2017

Journal title :

BMJ Open

eISSN :

2044-6055

Publisher :

BMJ Publishing Group

Volume :

Issue :

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Available on ORBi :

since 25 May 2020

Statistics

Number of views

45 (1 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

60 (2 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

OpenAlex citations

Bibliography

Hlustík P, Solodkin A, Gullapalli RP, et al. Somatotopy in human primary motor and somatosensory hand representations revisited. Cereb Cortex 2001;11:312-21.
Metman LV, Bellevich JS, Jones SM, et al. Topographic mapping of human motor cortex with transcranial magnetic stimulation: homunculus revisited. Brain Topogr 1993;6:13-19.
Rathelot JA, Strick PL. Subdivisions of primary motor cortex based on cortico-motoneuronal cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009;106:918-23.
Backman C, Gibson SCD, Parsons J. Assessment of hand function: the relationship between Pegboard Dexterity and Applied Dexterity. Can J Occup Ther 1992;59:208-13.
Dollar AM. Classifying human hand use and the activities of daily living. Springer Tracts Adv Robot 2014;95:201-16.
Young RW. Evolution of the human hand: the role of throwing and. J Anat 2007;202:1-14.
Makofske B, Dexterity M, Kreutzer JS, et al. Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. New York, NY: Springer New York, 2011:1522.
Di Bono MG, Begliomini C, Castiello U, et al. Probing the reachinggrasping network in humans through multivoxel pattern decoding. Brain Behav 2015;5.
Davare M, Duque J, Vandermeeren Y, et al. Role of the ipsilateral primary motor cortex in controlling the timing of hand muscle recruitment. Cereb Cortex 2007;17:353-62.
Steele CJ, Scholz J, Douaud G, et al. Structural correlates of skilled performance on a motor sequence task. Front Hum Neurosci 2012;6:289.
Tuch DS, Salat DH, Wisco JJ, et al. Choice reaction time performance correlates with diffusion anisotropy in white matter pathways supporting visuospatial attention. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:12212-7.
Johansen-Berg H, Della-Maggiore V, Behrens TE, et al. Integrity of white matter in the corpus callosum correlates with bimanual coordination skills. Neuroimage 2007;36(Suppl 2):T16-T21.
Della-Maggiore V, Scholz J, Johansen-Berg H, et al. The rate of visuomotor adaptation correlates with cerebellar white-matter microstructure. Hum Brain Mapp 2009;30:4048-53.
Mercado R, Constantoyannis C, Mandat T, et al. Expectation and the placebo effect in Parkinson's disease patients with subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation. Mov Disord 2006;21:1457-61.
Tomassini V, Jbabdi S, Kincses ZT, et al. Structural and functional bases for individual differences in motor learning. Hum Brain Mapp 2011;32:494-508.
Dexterity M, Kreutzer JS, et al. Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology somatotopy is extensively rep. 3. eds. New York: NY Springer New York, 2011.
Massano J, Bhatia KP. Clinical approach to Parkinson's disease: features, diagnosis, and principles of management. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 2012;2:a008870-15.
Lang CE, Bland MD. Assessment of Upper Extremity impairment and Activity Following Stroke: Foundations for Clinical Decision Making. 2014;26:104-15.
Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, van der Grond J, et al. Probability of regaining dexterity in the Flaccid Upper Limb in acute stroke. Stroke 2003;34:2181-6.
Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ. Predicting activities after stroke: what is clinically relevant? Int J Stroke 2013;8:25-32.
Olanow CW, Koller WC. An algorithm (decision tree) for the management of Parkinson's disease: treatment guidelines. Neurology 1998;50:S1
Lefaucheur JP, André-Obadia N, Antal A, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). Clin Neurophysiol 2014;125:2150-206.
Lefaucheur JP, Antal A, Ayache SS, et al. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Clin Neurophysiol 2017;128:56-92.
Monte-Silva K, Kuo MF, Hessenthaler S, et al. Induction of late LTPlike plasticity in the human motor cortex by repeated non-invasive brain stimulation. Brain Stimul 2013;6:424-32.
Rushmore RJ, DeSimone C, Valero-Cabré A. Multiple sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation to the intact hemisphere improves visual function after unilateral ablation of visual cortex. Eur J Neurosci 2013;38:3799-807.
Nitsche MA, Cohen LG, Wassermann EM, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation: state of the art 2008. Brain Stimul 2008;1:206-23.
Monte-Silva K, Kuo MF, Liebetanz D, et al. Shaping the optimal repetition interval for cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). J Neurophysiol 2010;103:1735-40.
Lüdemann-Podubecká J, Bösl K, Nowak DA. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for motor recovery of the upper limb after stroke. Prog Brain Res 2015;218:281-311.
WHO. Icf checklist. Organization, 2003:1-15.
Kostanjsek N. Use of the International classification of functioning, disability and Health (ICF) as a conceptual framework and common language for disability statistics and health information systems. BMC Public Health 2011;11(Suppl 4):S3.
Stucki G, Kostanjsek N, Ustün B, et al. ICF-based classification and measurement of functioning. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2008;44:315-28.
Le Q, Qu Y, Tao Y, et al. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on hand function recovery and excitability of the motor cortex after stroke: a meta-analysis. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2014;93:422-30.
Hao Z, Wang D, Zeng Y, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for improving function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD008862.
Tedesco Triccas L, Burridge JH, Hughes AM, et al. Multiple sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation and upper extremity rehabilitation in stroke: a review and meta-analysis. Clin Neurophysiol 2016;127:946-55.
Kang N, Summers JJ, Cauraugh JH. Transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates motor learning post-stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016;87:345-55.
Fregni F, Simon DK, Wu A, et al. Non-invasive brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005;76:1614-23.
Elsner B, Kugler J, Pohl M, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving function and activities of daily living in patients after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD009645.
Pollock A, Farmer SE, Brady MC, et al. Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014:CD010820.
Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 2015;349:g7647.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015;4:1.
Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, et al. Rayyan - a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 2016;5:210.
VonVille H. Excel Workbooks for Systematic Reviews & corresponding handouts: excel Workbooks for SRs. Univ. Texas. Heal. Sci. Cent. Houst. http://libguides. sph. uth. tmc. edu/excel- workbook- home/excel- SR- workbook.
Higgins JPT, Green S. The Cochrane Collaboration. Table 7.7.a: Formulae for combining groups. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011), 2011.
O'Brien AT, Amorim R, Rushmore RJ, et al. Motor Cortex Neurostimulation Technologies for chronic Post-stroke pain: implications of tissue damage on stimulation currents. Front Hum Neurosci 2016;10.
Bastani A, Jaberzadeh S. Does anodal transcranial direct current stimulation enhance excitability of the motor cortex and motor function in healthy individuals and subjects with stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Neurophysiol 2012;123:644-57.
Butler AJ, Shuster M, O'Hara E, et al. A meta-analysis of the efficacy of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation for upper limb motor recovery in stroke survivors. J Hand Ther 2013;26:162-71.
Kang N, Summers JJ, Cauraugh JH. Transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates motor learning post-stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016;87:345-55.
Zhu H, Lu Z, Jin Y, et al. Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on Parkinson motor function: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Acta Neuropsychiatr 2015;27:82-9.
Borenstein M, Hedges L V, Higgins JPT, et al. Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Psychother Res J Soc Psychother Res 2009;19:421.
StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: release 13. 2013. 2013.
Schünemann H, Brozek J, Guyatt G, et al. GRADE handbook for grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. GRADE Work. Gr, 2013. http://tech. cochrane. org/gradepro
O'Brien AT, Huerta R, Torrealba G, et al. Does non-invasive brain stimulation improve manual dexterity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016043809. 2016. http://www. crd. york. ac. uk/PROSPERO/display- record. asp? ID= CRD42016043809% 20
McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB. Retrieving randomized controlled trials from medline: a comparison of 38 published search filters. Health Info Libr J 2009;26:187-202.