Stroker-TMSNCT04080999
Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Spatial Attention After Stroke
A study testing r-TMS in people with Stroke, run by Azienda Usl di Bologna at 2 sites in Italy.
Trial summary
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) aiming at assessing the efficacy of a novel rehabilitation protocol, based on repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (r- TMS) in combination with a conventional cognitive treatment (CCT). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Stroke
- What is being tested?
- r-TMS
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 56 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesItaly
- Study dates
- 5 Dec 2018to 31 Dec 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 80 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Diagnosis of ischemic stroke in the right middle cerebral artery or right intra-cerebral hemorrhagic stroke, confirmed by brain CT and / or brain MRI;
- Diagnosis of LHSN with a specific test (asymmetry score on Bells cancellation test > 3]);
- Intra-hospital rehabilitation setting (ordinary hospitalization or DH) or outpatient setting;
- Age between 18 and 80 years;
- Time between stroke onset and study recruitment three weeks to three months;
- Availability to provide informed consent to participation.
Who cannot join
- Clinical instability at recruitment (for example, fever, acute internist conditions, etc.);
- History of epilepsy and / or occurrence in the acute phase of at least one seizure crisis
- Presence of intracranial metallic implants;
- Presence of devices, which could be altered by r-TMS, such as pacemakers, ventricular-peritoneal derivations, Baclofen pump;
- Absence of a bone operculum following a neurosurgical operation of decompressive craniotomy;
- Presence of behavioral disturbances with inversion of the sleep-wake rhythm
Show all 13Show fewer
- Mono- or bilateral occipital lesions documented on CT and / or history of cortical blindness or visual agnosia;
- Concomitant psychiatric disorders and / or history of substance abuse;
- State of pregnancy
- Inability to execute the following simple order: "Take the pen instead of the key and put it on the sheet"
- Severe acoustic deficit not corrected by the use of a hearing aid
- Severe reduction of the visus despite the use of eyeglasses
- Positive anamnesis of previous cognitive decline
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
Italy2 sites, 2 recruiting
- Recruiting
Ospedale Maggiore
Bologna, Bo, 40133
Francesco Di Gregorio, PhD, 3290762585, francesco.digregorio86@gmail.com
- Recruiting
Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale
Bologna, 40100
About this study
Official title: Efficacy of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (r-TMS) Combined With Conventional Cognitive Treatment on Cognitive-behavioral Symptoms of Left Hemispatial Neglect in Right-stroke Patients Within Three Months Post-onset Compared to Conventional Cognitive Treatment Only: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) aiming at assessing the efficacy of a novel rehabilitation protocol, based on repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (r- TMS) in combination with a conventional cognitive treatment (CCT). The protocol will be statistically compared to the same CTT administered without the r-TMS in a sample of right-stroke patients (age between 18 and 80 years) with left hemispatial Neglect.
Read the detailed description
BACKGROUND: A frequent and disabling impairment in persons who suffered acquired brain injury after stroke is left hemispatial neglect (LHSN). LHSN is a spatial attentive syndrome characterized by a reduced ability to attend, perceive and consciously represent the left contralesional space, in the absence of a primary sensory deficit. Commonly, the LHSN is due to a lesion on the right inferior parietal cortex and/or on the right fronto-parietal areas. Furthermore in stroke, LHSN is often associated with a mixture of attention and motor deficits leading to complex cognitive and behavioral pictures, which may even interfere with the administration of standard cognitive treatments for LHSN. However, several studies already demonstrated the efficacy of rehabilitation treatments on patients with LHSN, in terms of reducing disability, using various rehabilitative techniques and assessment tests. The rehabilitation techniques can be distinguished, accordingly to the used tools in: cognitive treatments (i.e. visual scanning training) and non-invasive brain stimulation methods (i.e. r-TMS). Conventional cognitive treatments (CCT) for LHSN involve different types of exercises aimed at reducing attentive bias for the ipsilesional space and/or promoting awareness of contralesional space by a continuous training of the patient's spatial exploration abilities. Instead, the TMS is a non-invasive method to modulate excitability of the cerebral cortex. The frequency of TMS pulse determines the type of modulation on the cerebral cortex (i.e. inhibitory <1 Hz; excitatory> 5 Hz). The most used TMS paradigm for the rehabilitation of LHSN is the r-TMS (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation) and it is based on the model of the inter-hemispheric competition. According to the model, the cerebral areas responsible for spatial orientation are contralateral to the attended hemifield (i.e. the left cerebral areas are responsible for the spatial orientation towards the right hemifield) and exert a reciprocal inter-hemispheric inhibition. The left and right fronto-parietal cortices are part of a intra-hemispheric network, which together with a parietal inter-hemispheric pathway, control the spatial orientation. In particular, a lesion on the right parietal cortex causes disinhibiting of the left parietal cortex and therefore a pathological over-activation of the latter.
According to the model, this left over-activation inhibits the right contralateral neural activity, as an increase of the healthy hemisphere inhibition activity on the damaged hemisphere. For these reasons, in the LHSN, a pathological orientation or pathological attention bias is determined towards the right hemifield after right stroke. Often, the r-TMS treatments aimed at rebalancing the inter-hemispheric competition through a stimulation of the parietal-parietal pathway, in particular inhibiting the intact areas of the left parietal cortex. The results showed significant post-treatment improvements in several neuropsychological and behavioral tests. In particular, a recent study showed how low- frequency r-TMS on the intact contralesional parietal areas reduced the clinical symptoms of LHSN after 10 treatment sessions. Improvements were stable 15 days after the treatment.
Despite evidence of efficacy of single treatment on cognitive symptoms of LHSN, many authors agree that the use of different rehabilitative techniques on the same patient are useful for generalizing clinical improvement and have a greater potential in reducing long-term global disability. However, in the literature, only few study tested effects of combined interventions on LHSN. Here, we aim at assessing the efficacy of a novel rehabilitation protocol, based on r-TMS in combination with a CCT, based on visual scanning training AIMS
To compare the efficacy of a combined r-TMS and CCT intervention aiming at reducing cognitive symptoms of LHSN, in a sample of right Stroke patients with LHSN, within the context of an RCT.
To evaluate the long- term impact of the intervention To evaluate the effect of the intervention on other clinical measures (activity of daily living, attentive and motor functions) and on psychophysiological indices.
METHODS: Multicenter, Randomized Controller Trial, with blind assessments on pre-test, post-test and on 3 months follow-up.
POPULATION: Right stroke patients with clinical evidence of LHSN INTERVENTION: Inhibitory low-frequency r-TMS on the intact left parietal cortex combined with a conventional cognitive treatment (visual scanning training) for 2 weeks. Multidisciplinary assessment with clinical and psychophysiological indices.
CONTROL: SHAM group with a placebo r-TMS stimulation combined with visual scanning training for 2 weeks. Multidisciplinary assessment with clinical and psychophysiological indices.
OUTCOMES:
The primary outcome is represented by a specific assessment of cognitive symptoms in LHSN with the Behavioral Inattention Test (BIT)
The secondary outcomes will consider the impact of the intervention on other clinical and psychophysiological indices. In particular we will test:
Activity of daily living and everyday life independence, attentive functions and motor independence.
A psychophysiological index based on Visual-Evoked Potentials
(VEPs). In particular we will focus on the N1 component, a posterior negativity, which is altered in terms of latency and amplitude in LHSN population. In order to study effects of the r-TMS in the inter-hemispheric parietal pathway, we will extract indices of inter-hemispheric transmission time (IHTT) on the N1 latency and of spatial attention bias on N1 amplitude.
EXPECTED RESULTS: In the intervention and in the control groups we expect a significant improvement of the clinical (cognitive, activity of daily living, attentive and motor functions) and psychophysiological indices, because both groups will be treated with an effective rehabilitation protocol (visual scanning training).
However, unlike the standard methods of rehabilitation, the new techniques of magnetic stimulation such as r-TMS allow the execution of a cognitive task through the pre-empowerment of a specific network or neuronal circuit. This effect could facilitate experiential learning during cognitive training, with a richer and more articulated neural environment, as well as selectively stimulated according to the areas most involved in the lesion. In the case of LHSN the mechanism of empowerment concerns the preserved parietal areas and the inter-hemispheric connectivity. As a consequence, r-TMS could increase the "responsiveness" of the peri-lesional areas and of the inter- hemispheric connectivity during cognitive training, increasing its effectiveness with respect to the SHAM condition. Therefore, we expect a larger improvement on the intervention group, because the r-TMS could modulate the responsiveness of the specific spatial attention pathway. At three months, it is expected a stabilization of functional improvements.
Randomization method In order to ensure that each arm will contain an equal number of individuals, eligible subjects will be randomly assigned to one of the two groups with a blocked randomization method based on a block size of 4.
Assessor and patient blindness: obviously, the physician who will administer the r- TMS or the SHAM stimulation will not be blind to the randomization. However, to ensure a double-blind assessment, pre-treatment assessments will be performed prior to randomization. An assessor not aware of the patient randomization group will conduct post-treatment and follow-up assessments. Also the visual scanning protocol will be administered by therapists unaware of the patient randomization and patients themselves will be instructed not to reveal any information on the brain stimulation treatment received.
Case report form and data monitoring Specific case report forms (CRF) for every test in the assessments are already available and will be used. During the treatment the responsible physician will report any adverse event in the treatment-CRF. All information and results will be promptly reported on the electronic database. A researcher will be responsible for the electronic database, data analyses and will draft the single patient record at the end of all procedures.
Maximization of inter-rater reliability of assessment and treatment methods
In order to minimize biases deriving from inter-rater measurement errors, the following interventions will take place during the start-up stage:
- Collegial assessment of voluntary patients by the various assessors and therapists in order to standardize the administration modalities and resolve discrepancies between scoring and treatment procedures.
- Subsequent development of an "assessment manual" and of a "treatment manual" containing all information necessary to the administering and scoring procedures.
Cases lost at follow-up In case of lost to follow-up, the information available up to that moment will be considered. If participant is lost at follow-up, it will be analyzed on the basis of the "intention to treat" principle. Finally, the reason for quit the study will be reported for each participant lost at follow-up.
Sample size
The sample size was calculated using the following formula:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/y56umrt7z93en1w/Simple%20size%20formula.docx? dl=0
The sample size resulting from the formula calculated for the BIT is 25.2. Consequently, the minimum sufficient simple to reach the primary aim is, assuming approximately 10% of subjects lost to follow-up, 60 subjects (30 X group) recruited over a three-year period.
Data Analyses In order to evaluate cognitive symptoms of LHSN in the two groups (primary outcome), differences in the BIT will be analyzed, between the pre-treatment (T0), post-treatment (T1) and follow-up (T2) phases for both groups of patients (r-TMS + CCT group and SHAM + CCT group). For this purpose, analyses of covariance will be performed for the BIT scale using a mixed-model ANCOVA with a 2X3 design, where the "between" factor is represented by the randomization group (r-TMS + CCT, SHAM + CCT) and the "within" factor is represented by the assessment time (T0, T1, T2). Whenever necessary, Greenhouse-Geiser correction will be applied and corrected p-values will be reported. In the ANCOVA, an adjustment will be made for the pre-treatment values and other possible confounding factors such as age, gender and education of the participants. Besides p-values, effect sizes will be provided in order to assess the size of treatment effect. Similar analyses will be performed also for the secondary outcomes on clinical and psychophysiological measures. Data analysis will be performed using Matlab (The Mathworks Inc.) and SPSS (version 13).
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Being tested
- r-TMS, SHAM
- Keywords
- r-TMS, Hemispatial Neglect, Visual Scanning
- Medical subject headings
- Stroke, Perceptual Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
r-TMSDevice
The interventions have a total administration time of 75 minutes per day.For TMS stimulation, the coil will be positioned tangentially on the target area. Each r-TMS session will last 15 minutes and will be administered every other day (e.g. Monday-Wednesday-Friday, Monday-Wednesday-Friday, Monday). The visual scanning treatment involves the presence of a therapist, who administers various visual scanning tasks, used to increase patient's awareness and to teach strategies to improve spatial exploration abilities (Pizzamiglio et al.,1992).Trainings include three increasing levels of difficulty (9 possible combinations). Each level of difficulty will be exercised until the patient reaches a level of accuracy of 75%. The CCT will be carried out in 50 minutes sessions for 5 days a week within 15 days (11 sessions in total). On the days when the r-TMS is also administered, the administration of the CCT will immediately follow the brain stimulation.
SHAMDevice
Device: SHAM Stimulation and Visual Scanning training. In the control group, the coil of the r-TMS will be positioned at 90° on the target area, thus no specific cortical modulation will be implemented (SHAM stimulation). For the SHAM group, the CCT protocol will be administered with the same modalities and time frame as detailed for the intervention group.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| r-TMS Group | Experimental | r-TMS Parameters International 10/20 system for the location of the target area (non-lesioned left parietal cortex) 60% Power Frequency: 1 Hz 90 pulse trains with 10 pulses each (total 900 stimuli), resulted in a total stimulation period of 15 minutes.
Visual Scanning Visual-spatial training; Reading and copying training; Copying of line drawings on a dot matrix. Barrage Receives: Device: r-TMS |
| Sham Group | Sham comparator | Sham stimulation and Visual scanning training Receives: Device: SHAM |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change from Baseline: behavioral Inattention Test (BIT)
A battery for the assessment of cognitive and behavioral symptoms in LHSN
Measured: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Secondary outcomes (7)
Change from Baseline: catherine Bergegò Scale (CBS)
A battery for the assessment of LHSN symptoms in the activity of daily living.
Measured: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: test of Attention Performance (TAP/TEA)
two subtest will be executed "alertness" and "Visual field/Neglect" to assess attentive functions
Measured: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: functional independence measure (FIM)
The motor subscale will be executed to assess motor independence
Measured: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: Motricity Index (MI)
A test to assess motor impairment in stroke patients.
Measured: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: Trunk Control Test (TCT)
A test to assess the ability to control the trunk after stroke.
Measured: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: Inter Hemispheric transmission Time (IHTT)
Psychophysiological index of inter-hemispheric transmission.
Measured: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: visual-Attention Bias Index (vABI)
Psychophysiological index of inter-hemispheric imbalance in a visual-spatial attention task
Measured: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Sep 2019
- Study start5 Dec 2018
- Primary completion31 Dec 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2022 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for StrokeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 56 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Azienda Usl di Bologna
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Collaborators
- Emanuela Casanova, Francesco Di Gregorio, Fabio La Porta, Roberto Piperno
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04080999
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 17075
- Acronym
- r-TMS
- Status last verified
- Feb 2022
- First submitted
- 5 Mar 2019
- Last updated
- 16 Feb 2022
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Individual participants data for all primary and secondary outcome measures will be made avalaible
Publications
Longley V, Hazelton C, Heal C, Pollock A, Woodward-Nutt K, Mitchell C, Pobric G, Vail A, Bowen A. Non-pharmacological interventions for spatial neglect or inattention following stroke and other non-progressive brain injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jul 1;7(7):CD003586. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003586.pub4.
PubMed 34196963Di Gregorio F, La Porta F, Casanova E, Magni E, Bonora R, Ercolino MG, Petrone V, Leo MR, Piperno R. Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with visual scanning treatment on cognitive and behavioral symptoms of left hemispatial neglect in right hemispheric stroke patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2021 Jan 6;22(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04943-6.
PubMed 33407787
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 Feb 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Efficacy of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (r-TMS) Combined With Conventional Cognitive Treatment on Cognitive-behavioral Symptoms of Left Hemispatial Neglect in Right-stroke Patients Within Three Months Post-onset Compared to Conventional Cognitive Treatment Only: a Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04080999
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- r-TMS / 17075
- Conditions
- Stroke
- Keywords
- r-TMS, Hemispatial Neglect, Visual Scanning
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 56 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Azienda Usl di BolognaOther government
- Collaborators
- Emanuela Casanova, Francesco Di Gregorio, Fabio La Porta, Roberto Piperno
- Study start
- 5 Dec 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2022 (estimated)
- First posted
- 6 Sep 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) aiming at assessing the efficacy of a novel rehabilitation protocol, based on repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (r- TMS) in combination with a conventional cognitive treatment (CCT). The protocol will be statistically compared to the same CTT administered without the r-TMS in a sample of right-stroke patients (age between 18 and 80 years) with left hemispatial Neglect.
Detailed description
BACKGROUND: A frequent and disabling impairment in persons who suffered acquired brain injury after stroke is left hemispatial neglect (LHSN). LHSN is a spatial attentive syndrome characterized by a reduced ability to attend, perceive and consciously represent the left contralesional space, in the absence of a primary sensory deficit. Commonly, the LHSN is due to a lesion on the right inferior parietal cortex and/or on the right fronto-parietal areas. Furthermore in stroke, LHSN is often associated with a mixture of attention and motor deficits leading to complex cognitive and behavioral pictures, which may even interfere with the administration of standard cognitive treatments for LHSN. However, several studies already demonstrated the efficacy of rehabilitation treatments on patients with LHSN, in terms of reducing disability, using various rehabilitative techniques and assessment tests. The rehabilitation techniques can be distinguished, accordingly to the used tools in: cognitive treatments (i.e. visual scanning training) and non-invasive brain stimulation methods (i.e. r-TMS). Conventional cognitive treatments (CCT) for LHSN involve different types of exercises aimed at reducing attentive bias for the ipsilesional space and/or promoting awareness of contralesional space by a continuous training of the patient's spatial exploration abilities. Instead, the TMS is a non-invasive method to modulate excitability of the cerebral cortex. The frequency of TMS pulse determines the type of modulation on the cerebral cortex (i.e. inhibitory <1 Hz; excitatory> 5 Hz). The most used TMS paradigm for the rehabilitation of LHSN is the r-TMS (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation) and it is based on the model of the inter-hemispheric competition. According to the model, the cerebral areas responsible for spatial orientation are contralateral to the attended hemifield (i.e. the left cerebral areas are responsible for the spatial orientation towards the right hemifield) and exert a reciprocal inter-hemispheric inhibition. The left and right fronto-parietal cortices are part of a intra-hemispheric network, which together with a parietal inter-hemispheric pathway, control the spatial orientation. In particular, a lesion on the right parietal cortex causes disinhibiting of the left parietal cortex and therefore a pathological over-activation of the latter.
According to the model, this left over-activation inhibits the right contralateral neural activity, as an increase of the healthy hemisphere inhibition activity on the damaged hemisphere. For these reasons, in the LHSN, a pathological orientation or pathological attention bias is determined towards the right hemifield after right stroke. Often, the r-TMS treatments aimed at rebalancing the inter-hemispheric competition through a stimulation of the parietal-parietal pathway, in particular inhibiting the intact areas of the left parietal cortex. The results showed significant post-treatment improvements in several neuropsychological and behavioral tests. In particular, a recent study showed how low- frequency r-TMS on the intact contralesional parietal areas reduced the clinical symptoms of LHSN after 10 treatment sessions. Improvements were stable 15 days after the treatment.
Despite evidence of efficacy of single treatment on cognitive symptoms of LHSN, many authors agree that the use of different rehabilitative techniques on the same patient are useful for generalizing clinical improvement and have a greater potential in reducing long-term global disability. However, in the literature, only few study tested effects of combined interventions on LHSN. Here, we aim at assessing the efficacy of a novel rehabilitation protocol, based on r-TMS in combination with a CCT, based on visual scanning training AIMS
To compare the efficacy of a combined r-TMS and CCT intervention aiming at reducing cognitive symptoms of LHSN, in a sample of right Stroke patients with LHSN, within the context of an RCT.
To evaluate the long- term impact of the intervention To evaluate the effect of the intervention on other clinical measures (activity of daily living, attentive and motor functions) and on psychophysiological indices.
METHODS: Multicenter, Randomized Controller Trial, with blind assessments on pre-test, post-test and on 3 months follow-up.
POPULATION: Right stroke patients with clinical evidence of LHSN INTERVENTION: Inhibitory low-frequency r-TMS on the intact left parietal cortex combined with a conventional cognitive treatment (visual scanning training) for 2 weeks. Multidisciplinary assessment with clinical and psychophysiological indices.
CONTROL: SHAM group with a placebo r-TMS stimulation combined with visual scanning training for 2 weeks. Multidisciplinary assessment with clinical and psychophysiological indices.
OUTCOMES:
The primary outcome is represented by a specific assessment of cognitive symptoms in LHSN with the Behavioral Inattention Test (BIT)
The secondary outcomes will consider the impact of the intervention on other clinical and psychophysiological indices. In particular we will test:
Activity of daily living and everyday life independence, attentive functions and motor independence.
A psychophysiological index based on Visual-Evoked Potentials
(VEPs). In particular we will focus on the N1 component, a posterior negativity, which is altered in terms of latency and amplitude in LHSN population. In order to study effects of the r-TMS in the inter-hemispheric parietal pathway, we will extract indices of inter-hemispheric transmission time (IHTT) on the N1 latency and of spatial attention bias on N1 amplitude.
EXPECTED RESULTS: In the intervention and in the control groups we expect a significant improvement of the clinical (cognitive, activity of daily living, attentive and motor functions) and psychophysiological indices, because both groups will be treated with an effective rehabilitation protocol (visual scanning training).
However, unlike the standard methods of rehabilitation, the new techniques of magnetic stimulation such as r-TMS allow the execution of a cognitive task through the pre-empowerment of a specific network or neuronal circuit. This effect could facilitate experiential learning during cognitive training, with a richer and more articulated neural environment, as well as selectively stimulated according to the areas most involved in the lesion. In the case of LHSN the mechanism of empowerment concerns the preserved parietal areas and the inter-hemispheric connectivity. As a consequence, r-TMS could increase the "responsiveness" of the peri-lesional areas and of the inter- hemispheric connectivity during cognitive training, increasing its effectiveness with respect to the SHAM condition. Therefore, we expect a larger improvement on the intervention group, because the r-TMS could modulate the responsiveness of the specific spatial attention pathway. At three months, it is expected a stabilization of functional improvements.
Randomization method In order to ensure that each arm will contain an equal number of individuals, eligible subjects will be randomly assigned to one of the two groups with a blocked randomization method based on a block size of 4.
Assessor and patient blindness: obviously, the physician who will administer the r- TMS or the SHAM stimulation will not be blind to the randomization. However, to ensure a double-blind assessment, pre-treatment assessments will be performed prior to randomization. An assessor not aware of the patient randomization group will conduct post-treatment and follow-up assessments. Also the visual scanning protocol will be administered by therapists unaware of the patient randomization and patients themselves will be instructed not to reveal any information on the brain stimulation treatment received.
Case report form and data monitoring Specific case report forms (CRF) for every test in the assessments are already available and will be used. During the treatment the responsible physician will report any adverse event in the treatment-CRF. All information and results will be promptly reported on the electronic database. A researcher will be responsible for the electronic database, data analyses and will draft the single patient record at the end of all procedures.
Maximization of inter-rater reliability of assessment and treatment methods
In order to minimize biases deriving from inter-rater measurement errors, the following interventions will take place during the start-up stage:
- Collegial assessment of voluntary patients by the various assessors and therapists in order to standardize the administration modalities and resolve discrepancies between scoring and treatment procedures.
- Subsequent development of an "assessment manual" and of a "treatment manual" containing all information necessary to the administering and scoring procedures.
Cases lost at follow-up In case of lost to follow-up, the information available up to that moment will be considered. If participant is lost at follow-up, it will be analyzed on the basis of the "intention to treat" principle. Finally, the reason for quit the study will be reported for each participant lost at follow-up.
Sample size
The sample size was calculated using the following formula:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/y56umrt7z93en1w/Simple%20size%20formula.docx? dl=0
The sample size resulting from the formula calculated for the BIT is 25.2. Consequently, the minimum sufficient simple to reach the primary aim is, assuming approximately 10% of subjects lost to follow-up, 60 subjects (30 X group) recruited over a three-year period.
Data Analyses In order to evaluate cognitive symptoms of LHSN in the two groups (primary outcome), differences in the BIT will be analyzed, between the pre-treatment (T0), post-treatment (T1) and follow-up (T2) phases for both groups of patients (r-TMS + CCT group and SHAM + CCT group). For this purpose, analyses of covariance will be performed for the BIT scale using a mixed-model ANCOVA with a 2X3 design, where the "between" factor is represented by the randomization group (r-TMS + CCT, SHAM + CCT) and the "within" factor is represented by the assessment time (T0, T1, T2). Whenever necessary, Greenhouse-Geiser correction will be applied and corrected p-values will be reported. In the ANCOVA, an adjustment will be made for the pre-treatment values and other possible confounding factors such as age, gender and education of the participants. Besides p-values, effect sizes will be provided in order to assess the size of treatment effect. Similar analyses will be performed also for the secondary outcomes on clinical and psychophysiological measures. Data analysis will be performed using Matlab (The Mathworks Inc.) and SPSS (version 13).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, care provider, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| r-TMS Group | Experimental | Device: r-TMSr-TMS Parameters International 10/20 system for the location of the target area (non-lesioned left parietal cortex) 60% Power Frequency: 1 Hz 90 pulse trains with 10 pulses each (total 900 stimuli), resulted in a total stimulation period of 15 minutes. Visual Scanning Visual-spatial training; Reading and copying training; Copying of line drawings on a dot matrix. Barrage |
| Sham Group | Sham comparator | Device: SHAMSham stimulation and Visual scanning training |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Diagnosis of ischemic stroke in the right middle cerebral artery or right intra-cerebral hemorrhagic stroke, confirmed by brain CT and / or brain MRI;
- Diagnosis of LHSN with a specific test (asymmetry score on Bells cancellation test > 3]);
- Intra-hospital rehabilitation setting (ordinary hospitalization or DH) or outpatient setting;
- Age between 18 and 80 years;
- Time between stroke onset and study recruitment three weeks to three months;
Key exclusion criteria (13 listed)
- Clinical instability at recruitment (for example, fever, acute internist conditions, etc.);
- History of epilepsy and / or occurrence in the acute phase of at least one seizure crisis
- Presence of intracranial metallic implants;
- Presence of devices, which could be altered by r-TMS, such as pacemakers, ventricular-peritoneal derivations, Baclofen pump;
- Absence of a bone operculum following a neurosurgical operation of decompressive craniotomy;
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 |
|---|---|---|
| r-TMSThe interventions have a total administration time of 75 minutes per day.For TMS stimulation, the coil will be positioned tangentially on the target area. Each r-TMS session will last 15 minutes and will be administered every other day (e.g. Monday-Wednesday-Friday, Monday-Wednesday-Friday, Monday). The visual scanning treatment involves the presence of a therapist, who administers various visual scanning tasks, used to increase patient's awareness and to teach strategies to improve spatial exploration abilities (Pizzamiglio et al.,1992).Trainings include three increasing levels of difficulty (9 possible combinations). Each level of difficulty will be exercised until the patient reaches a level of accuracy of 75%. The CCT will be carried out in 50 minutes sessions for 5 days a week within 15 days (11 sessions in total). On the days when the r-TMS is also administered, the administration of the CCT will immediately follow the brain stimulation. | Device | r-TMS Group |
| SHAMDevice: SHAM Stimulation and Visual Scanning training. In the control group, the coil of the r-TMS will be positioned at 90° on the target area, thus no specific cortical modulation will be implemented (SHAM stimulation). For the SHAM group, the CCT protocol will be administered with the same modalities and time frame as detailed for the intervention group. | Device | Sham Group |
Primary outcome
Change from Baseline: behavioral Inattention Test (BIT)
Time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
A battery for the assessment of cognitive and behavioral symptoms in LHSN
7 secondary outcomes
Change from Baseline: catherine Bergegò Scale (CBS)
Time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: test of Attention Performance (TAP/TEA)
Time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: functional independence measure (FIM)
Time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: Motricity Index (MI)
Time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: Trunk Control Test (TCT)
Time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: Inter Hemispheric transmission Time (IHTT)
Time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Change from Baseline: visual-Attention Bias Index (vABI)
Time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 16 Feb 2022.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 34196963Longley V, Hazelton C, Heal C, Pollock A, Woodward-Nutt K, Mitchell C, Pobric G, Vail A, Bowen A. Non-pharmacological interventions for spatial neglect or inattention following stroke and other non-progressive brain injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jul 1;7(7):CD003586. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003586.pub4.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33407787Di Gregorio F, La Porta F, Casanova E, Magni E, Bonora R, Ercolino MG, Petrone V, Leo MR, Piperno R. Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with visual scanning treatment on cognitive and behavioral symptoms of left hemispatial neglect in right hemispheric stroke patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2021 Jan 6;22(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04943-6.
- Azouvi, P., Jacquin-Courtois, S., \& Luauté, J. (2016). Rehabilitation of unilateral neglect: Evidence-based medicine. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Barnett, K. J., \& Corballis, M. C. (2005). Speeded right-to-left information transfer: The result of speeded transmission in right-hemisphere axons? Neuroscience Letters, 380(1-2), 88-92.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Corbetta M, Kincade MJ, Lewis C, Snyder AZ, \& A., S. (2005). Neural basis and recovery of spatial attention deficits in spatial neglect. Nat Neurosci., 8(11), 1603-1610Link provided by the sponsor.
- Di Russo, F., Bozzacchi, C., Matano, A., \& Spinelli, D. (2013). Hemispheric differences in VEPs to lateralised stimuli are a marker of recovery from neglect. Cortex, 49(4), 931-939Link provided by the sponsor.
- Jacquin-courtois, S. (2015). ScienceDirect Hemi-spatial neglect rehabilitation using non-invasive brain stimulation : Or how to modulate the disconnection syndrome ? Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 58(4), 251-258.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Müri, R. M., Cazzoli, D., Nef, T., Urs, P., \& Nyffeler, T. (2013). Non-invasive brain stimulation in neglect rehabilitation : an update, 7(June), 1-10.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Individual participants data for all primary and secondary outcome measures will be made avalaible
Related trials for Stroke
Not yet recruiting
Temporal Interference Stimulation for Upper-Limb Motor Recovery in Early Subacute Stroke
Acute Ischemic Stroke
RecruitingObservational study
ELATE Study: Evaluating Large-vessel Acute Thrombectomy in Extended Time Window
Acute Ichemic Stroke
Recruiting
Web-Based Tele-Rehabilitation Using Action Observation and Mirror Therapy for Subacute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Stroke, Upper Extremity Paresis
Recruiting
Early Motor-Cognitive Integrative Training on Cognitive and Motor Performance in Patients With Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Subarachnoid Aneurysm Hemorrhage
Not yet recruiting
Selective Intra-Arterial Hypothermia After Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion
Acute Ischemic Stroke, Basilar Artery Occlusion
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.
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing r-TMS in people with Stroke, run by Azienda Usl di Bologna at 2 sites in Italy.
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 6 inclusion and 13 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 Feb 2022. 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 Italy. 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. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Emanuela Casanova, Md (3398999147, e.casanova@ausl.bologna.it), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change from Baseline: behavioral Inattention Test (BIT) (time frame: up to 21 days post baseline and up to 90 days follow-up). 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 NCT04080999, which also lists 2 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 16 Feb 2022.