» Articles » PMID: 35978374

Timing of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Combined with Speech and Language Therapy (SLT) for Aphasia: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview
Journal Trials
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2022 Aug 17
PMID 35978374
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Studies suggest that language recovery in aphasia may be improved by pairing speech-language therapy with transcranial direct current stimulation. However, results from many studies have been inconclusive regarding the impact transcranial direct current stimulation may have on language recovery in individuals with aphasia. An important factor that may impact the efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation is its timing relative to speech-language therapy. Namely, online transcranial direct current stimulation (paired with speech-language therapy) and offline transcranial direct current stimulation (prior to or following speech-language therapy) may have differential effects on language recovery in post-stroke aphasia. Transcranial direct current stimulation provided immediately before speech-language therapy may prime the language system whereas stimulation provided immediately after speech-language therapy may aid in memory consolidation. The main aim of this study is to investigate the differential effects of offline and online transcranial direct stimulation on language recovery (i.e., conversation) in post-stroke aphasia.

Methods/design: The study is a randomized, parallel-assignment, double-blind treatment study. Participants will be randomized to one of four treatment conditions and will participate in 15 treatment sessions. All groups receive speech-language therapy in the form of computer-based script practice. Three groups will receive transcranial direct current stimulation: prior to speech-language therapy, concurrent with speech-language therapy, or following speech-language therapy. One group will receive sham stimulation (speech-language therapy only). We aim to include 12 participants per group (48 total). We will use fMRI-guided neuronavigation to determine placement of transcranial direct stimulation electrodes on participants' left angular gyrus. Participants will be assessed blindly at baseline, immediately post-treatment, and at 4 weeks and 8 weeks following treatment. The primary outcome measure is change in the rate and accuracy of the trained conversation script from baseline to post-treatment.

Discussion: Results from this study will aid in determining the optimum timing to combine transcranial direct current stimulation with speech-language therapy to facilitate better language outcomes for individuals with aphasia. In addition, effect sizes derived from this study may also inform larger clinical trials investigating the impact of transcranial direct current stimulation on functional communication in individuals with aphasia.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03773406. December 12, 2018.

Citing Articles

Cerebellar Atrophy and Language Processing in Chronic Left-Hemisphere Stroke.

Newman-Norlund R, Gibson M, Johnson L, Teghipco A, Rorden C, Bonilha L Neurobiol Lang (Camb). 2024; 5(3):722-735.

PMID: 39175791 PMC: 11338304. DOI: 10.1162/nol_a_00120.


Behavioral, Functional Imaging, and Neurophysiological Outcomes of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Speech-Language Therapy in an Individual with Aphasia.

Ashaie S, Hernandez-Pavon J, Houldin E, Cherney L Brain Sci. 2024; 14(7).

PMID: 39061454 PMC: 11274865. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci14070714.


Disentangling neuroplasticity mechanisms in post-stroke language recovery.

Billot A, Kiran S Brain Lang. 2024; 251:105381.

PMID: 38401381 PMC: 10981555. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2024.105381.


Targeted neurorehabilitation strategies in post-stroke aphasia.

Shah-Basak P, Boukrina O, Li X, Jebahi F, Kielar A Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2023; 41(3-4):129-191.

PMID: 37980575 PMC: 10741339. DOI: 10.3233/RNN-231344.

References
1.
Hamilton R, Chrysikou E, Coslett B . Mechanisms of aphasia recovery after stroke and the role of noninvasive brain stimulation. Brain Lang. 2011; 118(1-2):40-50. PMC: 3109088. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2011.02.005. View

2.
Di Bernardi Luft C, Pereda E, Banissy M, Bhattacharya J . Best of both worlds: promise of combining brain stimulation and brain connectome. Front Syst Neurosci. 2014; 8:132. PMC: 4115621. DOI: 10.3389/fnsys.2014.00132. View

3.
Manheim L, Halper A, Cherney L . Patient-reported changes in communication after computer-based script training for aphasia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009; 90(4):623-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.10.022. View

4.
Shah-Basak P, Wurzman R, Purcell J, Gervits F, Hamilton R . Fields or flows? A comparative metaanalysis of transcranial magnetic and direct current stimulation to treat post-stroke aphasia. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2016; 34(4):537-58. DOI: 10.3233/RNN-150616. View

5.
Kaye R, Cherney L . Script Templates: A Practical Approach to Script Training in Aphasia. Top Lang Disord. 2016; 36(2):136-153. PMC: 5006751. DOI: 10.1097/TLD.0000000000000086. View