What are the barriers to participation in a neuromodulation pilot trial for aphasia after stroke?
Mariana Lopes Andreoli; Juli Thomaz de Souza; Priscila Watson Ribeiro; Rafael Dalle Molle da Costa; Taís Regina da Silva; Fernanda Cristina Winckler; Gabriel Pinheiro Modolo; Karen Fernanda Alves; Pedro Tadao Hamamoto Filho; Rafael Delascio Garcia; Luiz Eduardo Gomes Garcia Betting; Silmeia Garcia Zanati Bazan; Rodrigo Bazan; Gustavo José Luvizutto
Abstract
Purpose: Aphasia is a common and debilitating manifestation of stroke. Transcranial electrical stimulation uses low-intensity electric currents to induce changes in neuronal activity. Recent evidence suggests that noninvasive techniques can be a valuable rehabilitation tool for patients with aphasia. However, it is difficult to recruit patients with aphasia for trials, and the reasons for this are not well understood. This study aimed to elucidate the main difficulties involved in patient’s recruitment and inclusion in a randomized clinical study of neuromodulation in aphasia. Methods: We evaluated the reasons for the exclusion of patients in a pilot, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial in which patients diagnosed with motor aphasia after stroke were recruited from March to November 2018. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. Results: Only 12.9% (4) of patients with ischemic stroke were included in the clinical trial. A total of 87.1% (27) of the 31 recruited patients were excluded for various reasons including: sensory aphasia (32.2%), dysarthria (25.8%), spontaneous clinical recovery (16.1%), previous stroke (6.4%), and death or mutism (3.2%). Conclusion: The presence of other types of aphasia, dysarthria, spontaneous recovery, deaths, and mutism were barriers to recruiting patients evidenced in this neuromodulation study
Keywords
Referencias
1. Fridriksson J. Preservation and modulation of specific left hemisphere regions is vital for treated recovery from anomia in stroke. J Neurosci. 2010;30(35):11558- 64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2227-10.2010. PMid:20810877.
2. Saur D, Hartwigsen G. Neurobiology of language recovery after stroke: lessons from neuroimaging studies. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(1, Suppl.):S15-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2011.03.036. PMid:22202187.
3. Binder JR, Frost JA, Hammeke TA, Cox RW, Rao SM, Prieto T. Human brain language areas identified by functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci. 1997;17(1):353-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1523/ JNEUROSCI.17-01-00353.1997. PMid:8987760.
4. Volpato C, Cavinato M, Piccione F, Garzon M, Meneghello F, Birbaumer N. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tdcs) of broca’s area in chronic aphasia: a controlled outcome study. Behav Brain Res. 2013;247:211-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2013.03.029. PMid:23538068.
5. Baker JM, Rorden C, Fridriksson J. Using transcranial direct-current stimulation to treat stroke patients with aphasia. Stroke. 2010;41(6):1229- 36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.576785. PMid:20395612.
6. Feigin VL, Lawes CM, Bennett DA, Barker-Collo SL, Parag V. Worldwide stroke incidence and early case fatality reported in 56 population-based studies: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8(4):355-69. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70025-0. PMid:19233729.
7. Langhorne P, Bernhardt J, Kwakkel G. Stroke rehabilitation. Lancet. 2011;377(9778):1693-702. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60325- 5. PMid:21571152.
8. Pagliarin KC, Ortiz KZ, Barreto SS, Pimenta Parente MA, Nespoulous JL, Joanette Y, et al. Montreal-Toulouse Language Assessment Battery: evidence of criterion validity from patients with aphasia. J Neurol Sci. 2015;357(1- 2):246-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2015.07.045. PMid:26256126.
9. De Renzi E, Vignolo LA. The token test: a sensitive test to detect receptive disturbances in aphasics. Brain. 1962;85(4):665-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ brain/85.4.665. PMid:14026018.
10. Martins FC, Ortiz KZ. Proposta de protocolo para avaliação da apraxia de fala. Fono Atual. 2004;30:53-61.
11. Fridriksson J, Rorden C, Elm J, Sen S, George MS, Bonilha L. Transcranial direct current stimulation vs sham stimulation to treat aphasia after stroke: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2018;75(12):1470-6. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.2287. PMid:30128538.
12. Meinzer M, Darkow R, Lindenberg R, Flöel A. Electrical stimulation of the motor cortex enhances treatment outcome in post-stroke aphasia. Brain. 2016;139(Pt 4):1152-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/brain/aww002. PMid:26912641.
13. Polanowska KE, Leśniak MM, Seniów JB, Czepiel W, Członkowska A. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation in early rehabilitation of patients with post-stroke non-fluent aphasia: a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled pilot study. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2013;31(6):761-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/RNN-130333. PMid:24047756.
14. Devasenapathy N, Singh K, Prabhakaran D. Conduct of clinical trials in developing countries: a perspective. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2009;24(4):295- 300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/HCO.0b013e32832af21b. PMid:19444095.
15. Anjos SM, Cohen LG, Sterr A, Andrade KN, Conforto AB. Translational neurorehabilitation research in the third world: what barriers to trial participation can teach us. Stroke. 2014;45(5):1495-7. http://dx.doi. org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.003572. PMid:24643406.
Submitted date:
06/02/2020
Accepted date:
13/08/2020
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email