Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for management of post-stroke impairments: An overview of systematic reviews

Objective: To evaluate evidence from published systematic reviews of clinical trials to determine the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in stroke population. Methods: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched for systematic reviews up...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Woo-Jin Kim (Author), Charlotte Rosselin (Author), Bhasker Amatya (Author), Pouya Hafezi (Author), Fary Khan (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Medical Journals Sweden, 2020-02-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_08cc7b7b8736468c9ccfda8c1e3bf20b
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Woo-Jin Kim  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Charlotte Rosselin  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Bhasker Amatya  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Pouya Hafezi  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Fary Khan  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for management of post-stroke impairments: An overview of systematic reviews 
260 |b Medical Journals Sweden,   |c 2020-02-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 1650-1977 
500 |a 1651-2081 
500 |a 10.2340/16501977-2637 
520 |a Objective: To evaluate evidence from published systematic reviews of clinical trials to determine the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in stroke population. Methods: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched for systematic reviews up to 15 January 2019. Three authors independently screened the reviews and assessed the methodological quality, using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) appraisal tool. Quality of evidence for outcomes evaluated within the reviews was appraised with Grade of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Results: Twelve reviews (n = 9,117 participants) evaluated the effectiveness of rTMS on motor and non-motor (aphasia, depression, dysphagia and cognition) functions. The rTMS protocols applied and outcomes measured were diverse amongst the selected reviews. The findings suggest beneficial effect of rTMS with: "moderate quality" evidence for dysphagia and hemineglect, "low to moderate quality" evidence for motor function (upper limb function, daily activities), and "low quality" evidence for aphasia and post-stroke depression. Conclusion: Despite widespread use of rTMS, high-quality evidence for its routine use for the treatment of stroke survivors is lacking. Further studies are required to establish differential roles of various protocols and long-term effects of rTMS in the stroke population. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a stroke 
690 |a  transcranial magnetic stimulation 
690 |a  rehabilitation 
690 |a  systematic review 
690 |a Therapeutics. Pharmacology 
690 |a RM1-950 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, Vol 52, Iss 2, p jrm00015 (2020) 
787 0 |n  https://www.medicaljournals.se/jrm/content/html/10.2340/16501977-2637  
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1650-1977 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1651-2081 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/08cc7b7b8736468c9ccfda8c1e3bf20b  |z Connect to this object online.