We have located links that may give you full text access.
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Chronic Pain: A Meta-analysis.
Anesthesia, Essays and Researches 2017 July
BACKGROUND: In this meta-analysis, we explore the role of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), a noninvasive neuromodulation technique in the treatment of chronic pain.
METHODS: Studies comparing rTMS and conventional treatment for chronic pain were searched. The comparison was made for decrease in the pain scores with and without (sham) the use of rTMS after a follow-up interval of 4-8 weeks. All reported pain scores were converted into a common scale ranging from "0" (no pain) to "10" (worst pain).
RESULTS: Nine trials with 183 patients in each of the groups were included in the analysis. The decrease in pain scores with rTMS was 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI] being 1.46-0.78) (fixed effects, I(2) = 0%, P < 0.001) and in sham-rTMS was 0.28 (95% CI being 0.49-0.07) (Fixed effects, I(2) = 0, P = 0.01). The pooled mean drop in pain scores with rTMS therapy was higher by 0.79 (95% CI being 0.26-1.33) (fixed effects, I(2) = 0, P < 0.01). The duration and frequency of rTMS were highly variable across trials. Publication bias was unlikely (Egger's test, X-intercept = 0.13, P = 0.75).
CONCLUSIONS: Use of rTMS improves the efficacy of conventional medical treatment in chronic pain patients. This treatment is not associated with any direct adverse effects. However, the duration and frequency of rTMS therapy is presently highly variable and needs standardization.
METHODS: Studies comparing rTMS and conventional treatment for chronic pain were searched. The comparison was made for decrease in the pain scores with and without (sham) the use of rTMS after a follow-up interval of 4-8 weeks. All reported pain scores were converted into a common scale ranging from "0" (no pain) to "10" (worst pain).
RESULTS: Nine trials with 183 patients in each of the groups were included in the analysis. The decrease in pain scores with rTMS was 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI] being 1.46-0.78) (fixed effects, I(2) = 0%, P < 0.001) and in sham-rTMS was 0.28 (95% CI being 0.49-0.07) (Fixed effects, I(2) = 0, P = 0.01). The pooled mean drop in pain scores with rTMS therapy was higher by 0.79 (95% CI being 0.26-1.33) (fixed effects, I(2) = 0, P < 0.01). The duration and frequency of rTMS were highly variable across trials. Publication bias was unlikely (Egger's test, X-intercept = 0.13, P = 0.75).
CONCLUSIONS: Use of rTMS improves the efficacy of conventional medical treatment in chronic pain patients. This treatment is not associated with any direct adverse effects. However, the duration and frequency of rTMS therapy is presently highly variable and needs standardization.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app