Focal DystoniaPhase 1/2DSSNCT01738581
rTMS and Retraining in Focal Hand Dystonia
A Phase 1/2 study testing Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Sensorimotor Retraining and Non-specific Therapy in people with Focal Dystonia, run by University of Minnesota at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
This study is exploring a new experimental procedure in dystonia called repetitive transcranial magnetic brain stimulation (TMS) combined with rehabilitation. The purpose of the study is to determine whether repetitive TMS is effective as a treatment to reduce symptoms in dystonia as demonstrated by improved motor… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Focal Dystonia
- What is being tested?
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Sensorimotor Retraining and Non-specific Therapy
- Type of treatment
- Medical device, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 9 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Nov 2011to Jun 2015
- Phase
- Phase 1/2
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Greater than 18 years of age
- Symptoms of focal hand dystonia or writer's cramp
Who cannot join
- History of seizure or other neurologic disorder
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
University of Minnesota, Program in Physical Therapy
Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55414
Program in Physical Therapy, University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55455
About this study
Official title: Effectiveness of rTMS and Retraining in the Treatment of Focal Hand Dystonia
This study is exploring a new experimental procedure in dystonia called repetitive transcranial magnetic brain stimulation (TMS) combined with rehabilitation. The purpose of the study is to determine whether repetitive TMS is effective as a treatment to reduce symptoms in dystonia as demonstrated by improved motor performance.
Read the detailed description
BACKGROUND: Though the etiology of focal hand dystonia (FHD) is uncertain, two primary factors implicated in the development of dystonic symptoms are excessive cortical excitability and impaired sensorimotor processing.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the functional efficacy and neural effects of a Dual intervention of rTMS and sensorimotor retraining. Our working hypothesis is: subjects receiving the combined intervention will (1) display significantly improved handwriting measures; (2) report significant improvement in daily functional ability; (3) display reduced hand cramping compared; and (4) demonstrate reduced corticospinal excitability after the Dual intervention when compared to the rTMS+ stretching and massage (Sham) intervention.
METHODS: A randomized, single-subject, multiple baseline design with crossover is used for this study that will examine ten subjects with FHD with two interventions: five days of low-frequency 1 Hz rTMS + sensorimotor retraining (Dual intervention) vs. rTMS + stretching and massage (Sham). The rTMS is applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 90% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed.
- Conditions
- Focal Dystonia
- Being tested
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Sensorimotor Retraining, Non-specific Therapy
- Keywords
- focal hand dystonia (FHD), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), sensorimotor retraining
- Medical subject headings
- Dystonic Disorders, Dystonia, Focal, Task-Specific
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic StimulationDevice
Also called Magstim stimulator (Magstim Co. LTD, Whitland,UK), Neuromodulation
Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 90% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
Sensorimotor RetrainingBehavioural
Also called Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program,, Sensory and motor Retraining
For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed
Non-specific TherapyBehavioural
Also called Massage, Stretching
A non-specific massage and stretching program directed to the hand, wrist and forearm
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| rTMS + SMR, then rTMS + CTL | Experimental | First phase of treatment: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and sensorimotor retraining (SMR). Second phase of treatment: rTMS and control treatment (CTL) (CTL therapy consisted of non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion). Receives: Device: Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Behavioral: Sensorimotor Retraining; Behavioral: Non-specific Therapy |
| rTMS + CTL, then rTMS + SMR | Experimental | First phase of treatment: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion. Second phase of treatment: rTMS and sensorimotor retraining (SMR). Receives: Device: Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Behavioral: Sensorimotor Retraining; Behavioral: Non-specific Therapy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change From Baseline in Global Rating of Change at Posttest (Day 5)
Symptom severity was assessed using the global rating of change (GROC). For the GROC, participants were asked to identify between one to three functions most impacted by focal hand dystonia. At posttest 1 they were then asked to select a rating of perceived change that represented the level of function compared to baseline. Perceived change consisted of a ±7 point Likert scale (+7= a very great deal better, 0= no change, -7= a very great deal worse).
Measured: Baseline and Posttest
Secondary outcomes (6)
Change From Baseline in Arm Dystonia Disability Scale at Posttest (Day 5)
The Arm Dystonia Disability Scale (ADDS) is a survey where participants rate task difficulty for activities such as writing, handling utensils, and buttoning on a scale of 1-4 (1 = no difficulty ,4 = not able or marked difficulty). This is a subjective assessment of impairment due to focal hand dystonia. Scores are determined using an equation: total points scored, divided by the maximum possible (23), multiplied by the quotient by 90 and subtract from 90%. Scores range from 0%-90% with higher scores indicating more function.
Measured: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline in Sensation at Posttest (Day 5)
Examinations included two point discrimination. Two-point discrimination threshold was completed using a Disk-Criminator™. Participants were asked to reply "one" or "two" after each presentation. Static and dynamic stimuli were presented to the index and ring fingers bilaterally, meaning it was presented as a static stimuli or it was slowly swept across the skin (dynamic).
Measured: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline in Cortical Silent Period at Posttest (Day 5)
Cortical silent period (CSP) testing was completed during an isometric contraction of the target muscle whereby the motor evoked potential is followed by a short duration of electromyographic quiescence. The maximal voluntary contraction for finger abduction was recorded using a custom strain gauge placed around the index finger. Real-time visual feedback was given on a laptop screen to project the force produced by the participant and 20% of the maximum of three trials was calculated and displayed on a target line. For the CSP, participants were asked to contract until the target line was met, then a single transcranial magnetic stimulation pulse was delivered to the motor cortex. Ten trials were collected with a short rest period to prevent fatigue.
CSP duration was calculated in milliseconds (ms). CSP EMG data were first rectified, and then a 10-ms moving average calculation was applied to the data. The onset of the CSP was set as the time point of the delivery of the TM
Measured: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline for Pressure During Hand Writing at Posttest (Day 5)
Digitized handwriting was assessed using a computerized tablet (WACOM Co., Ltd., japan) with MovAlyzeR® (Neuroscript LLC, Tempe, AZ) hardware and software. Participants used a custom modified digitized pen (Kiko Software, Netherlands) to write in a self-selected pace and style on the tablet with real-time visual feedback. Writing tasks included "My country tis of thee" at a self-selected pace, repeated eight times. Data were sampled at 215 Hz (resolution: 5080 lpi, accuracy: ±0.01 pressure range: 0-800 g). Writing samples were segmented by points of minimal velocity into single strokes for analysis. Pressure for each stroke was automatically calculated within the software.
Measured: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline for Physician Rated Impairment at Posttest (Day 5)
Video recordings were made as participants wrote on a pad of paper with pen. Participants were asked to draw a series of 10 loops across the pad of paper followed by "The dog is barking" and their signature, each repeated four times. A physician blinded to participant allocation rated recordings. Scoring criteria were adapted from a standardized writer's cramp rating scale (WCRS) (Wissel et al., 1996), rating pathological flexion or extension at the wrist, fingers and elbow, presence of tremor, dystonic posture, writing speed and latency of dystonic symptoms. Final scores are expressed as a rating listed as a movement score.
Measured: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline in Physical Function at Posttest (Day 5)
Participants completed the full SF-36 assessment with subsection of interest: "physical functioning".
Measured: Baseline and Posttest
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 Nov 2012 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2011
- Primary completionJun 2015
- Study completionJun 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Focal DystoniaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of MinnesotaThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 1/2
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 9 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Minnesota
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Teresa J Kimberley, PhD, PT, Principal investigator, University of Minnesota, Program in Physical Therapy
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01738581
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 0608M91226-2
- Acronym
- DSS
- Status last verified
- Oct 2019
- First submitted
- 18 Sep 2012
- Last updated
- 18 Nov 2019
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Byl NN, Nagajaran S, McKenzie AL. Effect of sensory discrimination training on structure and function in patients with focal hand dystonia: a case series. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003 Oct;84(10):1505-14. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(03)00276-4.
PubMed 14586919Kimberley TJ, Borich MR, Arora S, Siebner HR. Multiple sessions of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in focal hand dystonia: clinical and physiological effects. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2013;31(5):533-42. doi: 10.3233/RNN-120259.
PubMed 23340117Kimberley TJ, Schmidt RL, Chen M, Dykstra DD, Buetefisch CM. Mixed effectiveness of rTMS and retraining in the treatment of focal hand dystonia. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015 Jul 9;9:385. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00385. eCollection 2015.
PubMed 26217209
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Nov 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effectiveness of rTMS and Retraining in the Treatment of Focal Hand Dystonia
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01738581
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- DSS / 0608M91226-2
- Conditions
- Focal Dystonia
- Keywords
- focal hand dystonia (FHD), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), sensorimotor retraining
- Phase
- Phase 1/2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 9 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of MinnesotaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Nov 2011
- Primary completion
- Jun 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jun 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 30 Nov 2012 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 28 Jun 2016
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is exploring a new experimental procedure in dystonia called repetitive transcranial magnetic brain stimulation (TMS) combined with rehabilitation. The purpose of the study is to determine whether repetitive TMS is effective as a treatment to reduce symptoms in dystonia as demonstrated by improved motor performance.
Detailed description
BACKGROUND: Though the etiology of focal hand dystonia (FHD) is uncertain, two primary factors implicated in the development of dystonic symptoms are excessive cortical excitability and impaired sensorimotor processing.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the functional efficacy and neural effects of a Dual intervention of rTMS and sensorimotor retraining. Our working hypothesis is: subjects receiving the combined intervention will (1) display significantly improved handwriting measures; (2) report significant improvement in daily functional ability; (3) display reduced hand cramping compared; and (4) demonstrate reduced corticospinal excitability after the Dual intervention when compared to the rTMS+ stretching and massage (Sham) intervention.
METHODS: A randomized, single-subject, multiple baseline design with crossover is used for this study that will examine ten subjects with FHD with two interventions: five days of low-frequency 1 Hz rTMS + sensorimotor retraining (Dual intervention) vs. rTMS + stretching and massage (Sham). The rTMS is applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 90% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| rTMS + SMR, then rTMS + CTL | Experimental | Device: Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Behavioral: Sensorimotor Retraining, Behavioral: Non-specific TherapyFirst phase of treatment: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and sensorimotor retraining (SMR). Second phase of treatment: rTMS and control treatment (CTL) (CTL therapy consisted of non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion). |
| rTMS + CTL, then rTMS + SMR | Experimental | Device: Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Behavioral: Sensorimotor Retraining, Behavioral: Non-specific TherapyFirst phase of treatment: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion. Second phase of treatment: rTMS and sensorimotor retraining (SMR). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Greater than 18 years of age
- Symptoms of focal hand dystonia or writer's cramp
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- History of seizure or other neurologic disorder
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic StimulationAlso: Magstim stimulator (Magstim Co. LTD, Whitland,UK), NeuromodulationApplied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 90% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. | Device | rTMS + CTL, then rTMS + SMR, rTMS + SMR, then rTMS + CTL |
| Sensorimotor RetrainingAlso: Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program,, Sensory and motor RetrainingFor sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed | Behavioural | rTMS + CTL, then rTMS + SMR, rTMS + SMR, then rTMS + CTL |
| Non-specific TherapyAlso: Massage, StretchingA non-specific massage and stretching program directed to the hand, wrist and forearm | Behavioural | rTMS + CTL, then rTMS + SMR, rTMS + SMR, then rTMS + CTL |
Primary outcome
Change From Baseline in Global Rating of Change at Posttest (Day 5)
Time frame: Baseline and Posttest
Symptom severity was assessed using the global rating of change (GROC). For the GROC, participants were asked to identify between one to three functions most impacted by focal hand dystonia. At posttest 1 they were then asked to select a rating of perceived change that represented the level of function compared to baseline. Perceived change consisted of a ±7 point Likert scale (+7= a very great deal better, 0= no change, -7= a very great deal worse).
6 secondary outcomes
Change From Baseline in Arm Dystonia Disability Scale at Posttest (Day 5)
Time frame: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline in Sensation at Posttest (Day 5)
Time frame: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline in Cortical Silent Period at Posttest (Day 5)
Time frame: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline for Pressure During Hand Writing at Posttest (Day 5)
Time frame: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline for Physician Rated Impairment at Posttest (Day 5)
Time frame: Baseline and Posttest
Change From Baseline in Physical Function at Posttest (Day 5)
Time frame: Baseline and Posttest
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Nov 2019.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 14586919Byl NN, Nagajaran S, McKenzie AL. Effect of sensory discrimination training on structure and function in patients with focal hand dystonia: a case series. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003 Oct;84(10):1505-14. doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(03)00276-4.
- Background: PubMed 23340117Kimberley TJ, Borich MR, Arora S, Siebner HR. Multiple sessions of low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in focal hand dystonia: clinical and physiological effects. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2013;31(5):533-42. doi: 10.3233/RNN-120259.
- Results publication: PubMed 26217209Kimberley TJ, Schmidt RL, Chen M, Dykstra DD, Buetefisch CM. Mixed effectiveness of rTMS and retraining in the treatment of focal hand dystonia. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015 Jul 9;9:385. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00385. eCollection 2015.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Focal Dystonia
Recruiting
Focused Ultrasound Unilateral Pallidotomy for Medication-Refractory Limb Dystonia
Limb Dystonia, Idiopathic Dystonia
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery for Focal Hand Dystonia
Dystonia, Focal Dystonia
Not yet recruiting
VTS Sensorimotor Neuromodulation in WC
Writer's Cramp, Dystonias
RecruitingPhase 2
A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of VIM0423 in Individuals With Isolated Dystonia
Dystonia
Active, not recruiting
Accelerated TMS for Focal Hand Dystonia
Isolated Focal Hand Dystonia
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Teresa J Kimberley, PhD, PT principal investigator
University of Minnesota, Program in Physical Therapy
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 1/2 study testing Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Sensorimotor Retraining and Non-specific Therapy in people with Focal Dystonia, run by University of Minnesota at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Nov 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this combined phase mean?
Phase 1 studies test a treatment in a small group of people for the first time or in a new way, mainly to check safety and find the right dose.
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 28 Jun 2016). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change From Baseline in Global Rating of Change at Posttest (Day 5) (time frame: Baseline and Posttest). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01738581, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Nov 2019.