Cervicogenic HeadacheNCT05582616
The Safety and Feasibility of tDCS Combined With Conservative Treatment for Cervicogenic Headaches
A study testing Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in people with Cervicogenic Headache, run by University of Calgary at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
Annually, up to 150,000 individuals are affected by cervicogenic headaches (CGH) in Canada with many of these cases being chronic. Current treatments for CGH are limited in efficacy and durability - indicating a dire need for novel interventions in this population. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Cervicogenic Headache
- What is being tested?
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 32 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- 3 Nov 2022to 24 Apr 2024
- 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 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Diagnosed with cervicogenic headaches based on International Headache Society Guidelines lasting greater than 12 weeks
- The International Headache Society Guidelines are as follows: A) Presence of a headache fulfilling criterion C; B) Clinical and/or imaging evidence of a disorder or lesion within the cervical spine or soft tissues of the neck, known to be able to cause headache; C) Evidence of causation demonstrated by at least two of the following: (a) Headache has developed in temporal relation to the onset of the cervical disorder or appearance of the lesion; (b) Headache has significantly improved or resolved in parallel with improvement in or resolution of the cervical disorder or lesion; (c) Cervical range of motion is reduced and headache is made significantly worse by provocative maneuvers; (d) Headache is abolished following diagnostic blockade of a cervical structure or its nerve supply.
- Average pain score ≥ 4/10 and Neck Disability score ≥ 28/50
Who cannot join
- Known cervical spine pathology (such as tumours or fractures)
- Nerve root pain/sensory loss
- Muscular or joint inflammatory conditions
- Neurological or psychiatric conditions
- Undergone recent surgery (within prior year)
- Have contraindications to tDCS (metal or electronic implants in the brain/skull; metal or electronic implants in other sites on the body; surgical procedures involving the head or spinal cord; skin problems such as dermatitis, psoriasis or eczema; epilepsy or a previous convulsion/seizure; fainting spells or syncope; pregnancy or any chance of pregnancy; previous electrical or magnetic stimulation)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: The Safety and Feasibility of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Conservative Treatment for Cervicogenic Headaches
Annually, up to 150,000 individuals are affected by cervicogenic headaches (CGH) in Canada with many of these cases being chronic. Current treatments for CGH are limited in efficacy and durability - indicating a dire need for novel interventions in this population. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and physiotherapy have a high degree of safety and have been studied as interventions for many other chronic pain conditions and headache disorders. We propose to study the feasibility and safety of tDCS alongside physiotherapy for CGH further in a randomized sham controlled trial.
Read the detailed description
Annually, up to 150,000 people in Canada and experience cervicogenic headaches (CGH) with many of these patients suffering from chronic CGH. CGH is a pain disorder where pain is perceived in the head but caused by dysfunction of the cervical spine and its anatomical structure. More specifically, the pathogenesis of CGH is due to the convergence of nociceptive afferents from the upper three cervical nerves and trigeminal nerves onto second-order neurons in the trigeminocervical nucleus. The pain signaling resulting from this is also modulated through sensorineural pathways involving the thalamus and the sensorimotor cortex. As such symptoms of CGH include restricted movement, local tenderness of the upper cervical spine joints, musculoskeletal impairments, headache, local pressure hyperalgesia and bilateral thermal hypoesthesia. To date, there is no "cure" for chronic CGH and current treatment entails trial and error with behavior management, environmental modifications and medications. Consequently, there is a significant need for new approaches to symptom management in order to help improve functional impairment and disease burden associated with treating CGH. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and physiotherapy have a high degree of safety and have been studied as an intervention for many other chronic pain conditions and headache disorders, including arthritis and migraines, demonstrating considerable potential. The investigators propose to study the safety and feasibility of tDCS alongside physiotherapy as a treatment for CGH in a randomized sham controlled trial.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND OBJECTIVES
The overall objective is to study the feasibility and safety of tDCS applied to the primary motor cortex in patients with CGH and to explore whether active tDCS augments the effect of rehabilitation therapy.
Specifically the objectives are:
Primary Objective: To determine whether active tDCS is feasible and safe compared to sham when administered with rehabilitation therapy for patients with CGH when administered 3 times per week over the course of 6 weeks. Safety will be measured through serious adverse events (defined as events requiring medical attention). Feasibility will be measured by recruitment (greater than 30%), retention (greater than 80%), and adherence (greater than 70%). These outcomes will be measured throughout the treatment process up to immediately post-treatment.
Secondary Objective: To determine what secondary outcomes such as quality of life, headaches, pain sensitivity, neck mobility, anxiety, and depression improve with active tDCS treatment in individuals suffering with CGH. Quality of life will be measured via the European Quality of Life Five Dimension (EQ-5D), headache intensity, frequency, duration, and impacts on life will be measured via headache diaries and the Headache Intensity Test - 6 (HIT-6), headache effects on participant function will be measured via the Headache Disability Index (HDI), neck pain intensity will be measured through the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), pain sensitivity will be measured via the Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire (PSQ), pain impacts on quality of life will be measured through the patient reported outcomes measurement information system - pain interference scale (PROMIS-PI), neck mobility will be measured through various motor control, strength, and endurance tests, feelings of depression will be measured via the PHQ-9 and anxiety via the GADS-7 before treatment after treatment and at 6- and 12- weeks post treatment.
Third objective: To explore whether the effects of active tDCS will augment the effects of rehabilitation therapy in treating individuals with CGH.
METHODS
This study will be a double-blind, sham-controlled, concealed allocation, randomized, clinical trial.
Clinical Assessments: Demographic information will be collected two weeks prior to starting the study including age, sex, education, headache history, concussion history, past medical history, medication use, and family medical history. Baseline questionnaires will be completed including 2-weeks of Headache Diaries Headache Impact Test - 6 (HIT-6), Rivermead PPCS questionnaire (RPQ), Headache Disability Index (HDI), European Quality of Life Five Dimension (EQ-5D), patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety disorder scale-7 (GADS-7), Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference Sub-scale (PROMIS-PI), the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Furthermore the following baseline neck mobility assessments will be used: the Craniocervical Flexion Test (CCFT), the Cervical Extensor Endurance Test (CEET), the Dynamometry Neck-Strength Assessment (DNSA), a range of cervical motion assessment (ROM), and a manual examination of the cervical joints (MECJ). Patients will keep a two-week baseline headache diary before treatment, 2 weeks during treatment, 2 weeks following tDCS, and for 2 weeks before the 6 and 12 week follow up assessments (total of 8 weeks). Patients will be reassessed at the completion of their tDCS treatment, and at 6- and 12-weeks post-treatment. The assessments administered at each follow up are: 2-week Headache Diaries, RPQ, HIT-6, HDI, EQ-5D, PHQ-9, GAD-7, NPRS, PCS, PROMIS-PI, CCFT, CEET, DNSA, ROM, and MECJ.
tDCS Protocol: Patients will engage in a six-week treatment protocol with 3 sessions per week (18 treatments). This was chosen to give participants at least a day between each session in order to minimize discomfort and because the number of sessions is consistent with previous migraine literature. The primary motor cortex (M1) will be the treatment target given previous literature highlighting reduced pain sensitivity and improved motor learning outcomes following tDCS stimulation of this region. M1 will be found through measurements of the head; more specifically the point halfway between the nasion and inion as well as halfway between the left and right tragus will be found, from here we will move down 20% of the distance between the left and right tragus while staying on the line between tragi. The anode will be placed over the M1 while the cathode will be placed over the super orbital region; each electrode will be held in place with a strap and will make as much contact with the skin as possible. tDCS will be delivered via two 35cm2 surface sponge electrodes at an intensity of 2mA in the active group and 0mA in the sham group. There will be a 30 second fade in and fade out period before and after stimulation with 20 minutes of active stimulation. In the sham condition, participants will only experience the 30 second fade in period and then the stimulator will be turned off. Previous sham studies have demonstrated the efficacy of this blinding method.
Physiotherapy Protocol: Participants will engage in a six-week physiotherapy program which will occur immediately following each tDCS session. The exercises to be used focus on head and back strength and motor control and were assembled by a licensed physiotherapist based on previous physiotherapy protocols for treating CGH. The exercises are performed at a level that is pain-free and are progressed when goals are reached (approximately every 2 weeks). Participants will also be expected to increase daily physical activity levels to 30 minutes per day for at least 5 days a week as a part of the physiotherapy program. This will be tracked using an exercise diary to be completed by participants each day.
Statistical Analysis: Summary statistics will be done and reported so that feasibility and safety can be assessed and future studies can use the results presented for power calculations.
- Conditions
- Cervicogenic Headache
- Being tested
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Sham Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
- Keywords
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Physiotherapy
- Medical subject headings
- Post-Traumatic Headache
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Transcranial Direct Current StimulationDevice
See treatment arm description
Sham Transcranial Direct Current StimulationDevice
See sham comparator arm description
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Active tDCS with physiotherapy | Experimental | Patients will engage in a six-week treatment protocol with 3 sessions per week (18 treatments). This was chosen to minimize discomfort and ensure the number of sessions is consistent with previous migraine literature. The primary motor cortex (M1) will be the treatment target to reduce pain sensitivity and improve motor learning. M1 will be found through measurements of the head: the point halfway between the nasion and inion and halfway between the left and right tragus will be found, we will then move down 20% of the inter-tragi distance and place the anode there. The cathode will then be placed over the super orbital region. Each electrode will be held in place with a strap and will make as much contact with the skin as possible. tDCS will be delivered via two 35cm2 surface sponge electrodes at an intensity of 2mA in the active group. Receives: Device: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation |
| Sham tDCS with physiotherapy | Sham comparator | In the sham condition, the number of sessions, placement of electrodes, and types of electrodes used will be the same, however, only a 30 second ramp up period will be administered to emulate active tDCS therapy. Patients will be able to hear the sounds of the device and will feel slight tingling for the first 30 seconds but will receive no active stimulation. Previous sham studies have demonstrated efficacy of the blinding method. Receives: Device: Sham Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Feasibility of tDCS through recruitment rate, retention rate in the study, and adherence rates to both tDCS and exercise therapy.
The feasibility of tDCS will be measured through the rate of participants contacted vs those actually enrolled (expected to be greater than 30%), through rate of those enrolled vs those completing 6-weeks of treatment (expected to be greater than 80% retained), and through rates of those who completed all 18 tDCS sessions in 6-weeks as well as the percentage of exercise therapy sessions completed within the 6-week study period (expected to be greater than 70% for both).
Measured: To be assessed throughout the 6 weeks of treatment and at post-treatment follow-up.
Safety of tDCS through adverse events and transient changes in adverse effects within each tDCS session.
The safety of tDCS will primarily be measured through tracking rates of serious adverse effects (defined as events requiring medical attention), to be considered safe we expect 0 events of this nature to occur. Additionally, changes in safety questionnaire scores tracking transient within-session changes were considered. Safety questionnaires ask participants to rate commonly experienced symptoms from 0-100 (0= "Not occurring", 100 = "Most severe"). The symptoms assessed are itchiness, tingling, burning sensations, headache, fatigue, nausea, and mood difficulties.
Measured: To be assessed throughout the 6 weeks of treatment up to the post-treatment follow-up.
Craniocervical Flexion Test (CCFT)
Fine motor control of neck muscles will be measured via the Craniocervical Flexion Test (CCFT).
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Secondary outcomes (13)
European Quality of Life Five Dimension (EQ-5D)
Quality of life will be measured via the European Quality of Life Five Dimension (EQ-5D). Ranges from 0-25 with higher scores indicating reduced quality of life.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT-6)
Headache intensity will be measured via the Headache Intensity Test - 6 (HIT-6). This test ranges between a score of 36 and 78 with higher scores meaning increased headache intensity and frequency.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Headache Disability Index (HDI)
Headache effects on participant function will be measured via the Headache Disability Index (HDI). Scores on this index range from 0-100 with higher scores indicating more severe disability as a result of headaches.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)
Pain sensitivity will be measured via the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Scores on this scale range from 0-52 with higher scores indicating greater sensitivity to pain.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
PROMIS Pain Interference Scale
Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain interference scale. Ranges from 4-20 with increasing scores meaning increased pain interference in daily life.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Cervical Extensor Endurance Test (CEET)
Neck muscle endurance will be measured via the Cervical Extensor Endurance Test (CEET).
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Dynamometry Neck-Strength Assessment (DNSA)
Neck muscle strength will be measured via the Dynamometry Neck-Strength Assessment (DNSA).
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Patient health questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9)
Depression will be measured via the patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Ranges from 0-27 with higher scores meaning more depressive symptoms.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Generalized anxiety disorder scale 7 (GADS-7)
Anxiety will be measured via the generalized anxiety disorder scale-7 (GADS-7). Ranges from 0-21 with her scores meaning more symptoms of anxiety.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Cervical Flexor Endurance Test (CFET)
Neck muscle endurance will be measured via the Cervical Flexor Endurance Test (CFET) as well.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Pain intensity will be assessed through the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS). This scale ranges from 0-10 with a higher score indicating more pain intensity.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Range of Motion of Cervical Joints (ROM)
Range of motion will be assessed through the range of cervical motion test (ROM). A cervical range of motion instrument which measures the angle of cervical motion in each direction (flexion, extension, right and left side bend, right and left rotation over the shoulder) will be used to calculate the total range of motion. This assessment will be pain limited.
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Manual Examination of Cervical Joints (MECJ)
Pain at each of the first 3 cervical joints will be assessed through a manual examination of the cervical joints (MECJ). Slight pressure will be applied at each of the first 3 cervical joints (C1/2, C2/3, C3/4) on each side (left and right) by a licensed physiotherapist and participants will be asked to rate their pain from 0-10 at each of these points when pressure is applied with 0 being no pain (more favorable outcome) and 10 being worst possible pain (less favorable outcome).
Measured: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Oct 2022
- Study start3 Nov 2022
- Primary completion24 Apr 2024
- Study completion24 Apr 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (44)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cervicogenic HeadacheStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of CalgaryThe 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Double blind randomized placebo controlled clinical trial.
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 32 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Calgary
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Alberta Health services
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Chantel T Debert, MD MSc FRCPC CSCN, Principal investigator, University of Calgary
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05582616
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- REB22-0890
- Status last verified
- Jan 2024
- First submitted
- 22 Aug 2022
- Last updated
- 27 Jun 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Langer L, Levy C, Bayley M. Increasing Incidence of Concussion: True Epidemic or Better Recognition? J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2020 Jan/Feb;35(1):E60-E66. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000503.
PubMed 31246881Barnsley L, Lord S, Bogduk N. Whiplash injury. Pain. 1994 Sep;58(3):283-307. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(94)90123-6. No abstract available.
PubMed 7838578Sjaastad O, Fredriksen TA, Batnes J, Petersen HC, Bakketeig LS. Whiplash in individuals with known pre-accident, clinical neck status. J Headache Pain. 2006 Feb;7(1):9-20. doi: 10.1007/s10194-006-0270-x. Epub 2006 Feb 20.
PubMed 16485074Lord SM, Barnsley L, Wallis BJ, Bogduk N. Third occipital nerve headache: a prevalence study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1994 Oct;57(10):1187-90. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.57.10.1187.
PubMed 7931379Lindblom U, Verrillo RT. Sensory functions in chronic neuralgia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1979 May;42(5):422-35. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.42.5.422.
PubMed 448382Becser N, Sand T, Pareja JA, Zwart JA. Thermal sensitivity in unilateral headaches. Cephalalgia. 1998 Dec;18(10):675-83; discussion 657. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-2982.1998.1810675.x.
PubMed 9950624Bogduk N, Govind J. Cervicogenic headache: an assessment of the evidence on clinical diagnosis, invasive tests, and treatment. Lancet Neurol. 2009 Oct;8(10):959-68. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70209-1.
PubMed 19747657Bogduk N. Cervicogenic headache: anatomic basis and pathophysiologic mechanisms. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2001 Aug;5(4):382-6. doi: 10.1007/s11916-001-0029-7.
PubMed 11403743Dumas JP, Arsenault AB, Boudreau G, Magnoux E, Lepage Y, Bellavance A, Loisel P. Physical impairments in cervicogenic headache: traumatic vs. nontraumatic onset. Cephalalgia. 2001 Nov;21(9):884-93. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-2982.2001.00264.x.
PubMed 11903282Manchikanti L, Pampati V, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. Cost Utility Analysis of Cervical Therapeutic Medial Branch Blocks in Managing Chronic Neck Pain. Int J Med Sci. 2017 Oct 15;14(13):1307-1316. doi: 10.7150/ijms.20755. eCollection 2017.
PubMed 29200944Frazer A, Williams J, Spittles M, Rantalainen T, Kidgell D. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex increases cortical voluntary activation and neural plasticity. Muscle Nerve. 2016 Nov;54(5):903-913. doi: 10.1002/mus.25143. Epub 2016 May 20.
PubMed 27065472Rroji O, van Kuyck K, Nuttin B, Wenderoth N. Anodal tDCS over the Primary Motor Cortex Facilitates Long-Term Memory Formation Reflecting Use-Dependent Plasticity. PLoS One. 2015 May 21;10(5):e0127270. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127270. eCollection 2015.
PubMed 25996937Zaninotto AL, El-Hagrassy MM, Green JR, Babo M, Paglioni VM, Benute GG, Paiva WS. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) effects on traumatic brain injury (TBI) recovery: A systematic review. Dement Neuropsychol. 2019 Apr-Jun;13(2):172-179. doi: 10.1590/1980-57642018dn13-020005.
PubMed 31285791Wessel MJ, Zimerman M, Hummel FC. Non-invasive brain stimulation: an interventional tool for enhancing behavioral training after stroke. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015 May 15;9:265. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00265. eCollection 2015.
PubMed 26029083O'Connell NE, Marston L, Spencer S, DeSouza LH, Wand BM. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Apr 13;4(4):CD008208. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008208.pub5.
PubMed 29652088
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Jun 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Safety and Feasibility of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Conservative Treatment for Cervicogenic Headaches
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05582616
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- REB22-0890
- Conditions
- Cervicogenic Headache
- Keywords
- Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Physiotherapy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 32 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of CalgaryUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Alberta Health services
- Study start
- 3 Nov 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 24 Apr 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 24 Apr 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Oct 2022 (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.
Annually, up to 150,000 individuals are affected by cervicogenic headaches (CGH) in Canada with many of these cases being chronic. Current treatments for CGH are limited in efficacy and durability - indicating a dire need for novel interventions in this population. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and physiotherapy have a high degree of safety and have been studied as interventions for many other chronic pain conditions and headache disorders. We propose to study the feasibility and safety of tDCS alongside physiotherapy for CGH further in a randomized sham controlled trial.
Detailed description
Annually, up to 150,000 people in Canada and experience cervicogenic headaches (CGH) with many of these patients suffering from chronic CGH. CGH is a pain disorder where pain is perceived in the head but caused by dysfunction of the cervical spine and its anatomical structure. More specifically, the pathogenesis of CGH is due to the convergence of nociceptive afferents from the upper three cervical nerves and trigeminal nerves onto second-order neurons in the trigeminocervical nucleus. The pain signaling resulting from this is also modulated through sensorineural pathways involving the thalamus and the sensorimotor cortex. As such symptoms of CGH include restricted movement, local tenderness of the upper cervical spine joints, musculoskeletal impairments, headache, local pressure hyperalgesia and bilateral thermal hypoesthesia. To date, there is no "cure" for chronic CGH and current treatment entails trial and error with behavior management, environmental modifications and medications. Consequently, there is a significant need for new approaches to symptom management in order to help improve functional impairment and disease burden associated with treating CGH. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and physiotherapy have a high degree of safety and have been studied as an intervention for many other chronic pain conditions and headache disorders, including arthritis and migraines, demonstrating considerable potential. The investigators propose to study the safety and feasibility of tDCS alongside physiotherapy as a treatment for CGH in a randomized sham controlled trial.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND OBJECTIVES
The overall objective is to study the feasibility and safety of tDCS applied to the primary motor cortex in patients with CGH and to explore whether active tDCS augments the effect of rehabilitation therapy.
Specifically the objectives are:
Primary Objective: To determine whether active tDCS is feasible and safe compared to sham when administered with rehabilitation therapy for patients with CGH when administered 3 times per week over the course of 6 weeks. Safety will be measured through serious adverse events (defined as events requiring medical attention). Feasibility will be measured by recruitment (greater than 30%), retention (greater than 80%), and adherence (greater than 70%). These outcomes will be measured throughout the treatment process up to immediately post-treatment.
Secondary Objective: To determine what secondary outcomes such as quality of life, headaches, pain sensitivity, neck mobility, anxiety, and depression improve with active tDCS treatment in individuals suffering with CGH. Quality of life will be measured via the European Quality of Life Five Dimension (EQ-5D), headache intensity, frequency, duration, and impacts on life will be measured via headache diaries and the Headache Intensity Test - 6 (HIT-6), headache effects on participant function will be measured via the Headache Disability Index (HDI), neck pain intensity will be measured through the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), pain sensitivity will be measured via the Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire (PSQ), pain impacts on quality of life will be measured through the patient reported outcomes measurement information system - pain interference scale (PROMIS-PI), neck mobility will be measured through various motor control, strength, and endurance tests, feelings of depression will be measured via the PHQ-9 and anxiety via the GADS-7 before treatment after treatment and at 6- and 12- weeks post treatment.
Third objective: To explore whether the effects of active tDCS will augment the effects of rehabilitation therapy in treating individuals with CGH.
METHODS
This study will be a double-blind, sham-controlled, concealed allocation, randomized, clinical trial.
Clinical Assessments: Demographic information will be collected two weeks prior to starting the study including age, sex, education, headache history, concussion history, past medical history, medication use, and family medical history. Baseline questionnaires will be completed including 2-weeks of Headache Diaries Headache Impact Test - 6 (HIT-6), Rivermead PPCS questionnaire (RPQ), Headache Disability Index (HDI), European Quality of Life Five Dimension (EQ-5D), patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety disorder scale-7 (GADS-7), Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference Sub-scale (PROMIS-PI), the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Furthermore the following baseline neck mobility assessments will be used: the Craniocervical Flexion Test (CCFT), the Cervical Extensor Endurance Test (CEET), the Dynamometry Neck-Strength Assessment (DNSA), a range of cervical motion assessment (ROM), and a manual examination of the cervical joints (MECJ). Patients will keep a two-week baseline headache diary before treatment, 2 weeks during treatment, 2 weeks following tDCS, and for 2 weeks before the 6 and 12 week follow up assessments (total of 8 weeks). Patients will be reassessed at the completion of their tDCS treatment, and at 6- and 12-weeks post-treatment. The assessments administered at each follow up are: 2-week Headache Diaries, RPQ, HIT-6, HDI, EQ-5D, PHQ-9, GAD-7, NPRS, PCS, PROMIS-PI, CCFT, CEET, DNSA, ROM, and MECJ.
tDCS Protocol: Patients will engage in a six-week treatment protocol with 3 sessions per week (18 treatments). This was chosen to give participants at least a day between each session in order to minimize discomfort and because the number of sessions is consistent with previous migraine literature. The primary motor cortex (M1) will be the treatment target given previous literature highlighting reduced pain sensitivity and improved motor learning outcomes following tDCS stimulation of this region. M1 will be found through measurements of the head; more specifically the point halfway between the nasion and inion as well as halfway between the left and right tragus will be found, from here we will move down 20% of the distance between the left and right tragus while staying on the line between tragi. The anode will be placed over the M1 while the cathode will be placed over the super orbital region; each electrode will be held in place with a strap and will make as much contact with the skin as possible. tDCS will be delivered via two 35cm2 surface sponge electrodes at an intensity of 2mA in the active group and 0mA in the sham group. There will be a 30 second fade in and fade out period before and after stimulation with 20 minutes of active stimulation. In the sham condition, participants will only experience the 30 second fade in period and then the stimulator will be turned off. Previous sham studies have demonstrated the efficacy of this blinding method.
Physiotherapy Protocol: Participants will engage in a six-week physiotherapy program which will occur immediately following each tDCS session. The exercises to be used focus on head and back strength and motor control and were assembled by a licensed physiotherapist based on previous physiotherapy protocols for treating CGH. The exercises are performed at a level that is pain-free and are progressed when goals are reached (approximately every 2 weeks). Participants will also be expected to increase daily physical activity levels to 30 minutes per day for at least 5 days a week as a part of the physiotherapy program. This will be tracked using an exercise diary to be completed by participants each day.
Statistical Analysis: Summary statistics will be done and reported so that feasibility and safety can be assessed and future studies can use the results presented for power calculations.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Double blind randomized placebo controlled clinical trial.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Active tDCS with physiotherapy | Experimental | Device: Transcranial Direct Current StimulationPatients will engage in a six-week treatment protocol with 3 sessions per week (18 treatments). This was chosen to minimize discomfort and ensure the number of sessions is consistent with previous migraine literature. The primary motor cortex (M1) will be the treatment target to reduce pain sensitivity and improve motor learning. M1 will be found through measurements of the head: the point halfway between the nasion and inion and halfway between the left and right tragus will be found, we will then move down 20% of the inter-tragi distance and place the anode there. The cathode will then be placed over the super orbital region. Each electrode will be held in place with a strap and will make as much contact with the skin as possible. tDCS will be delivered via two 35cm2 surface sponge electrodes at an intensity of 2mA in the active group. |
| Sham tDCS with physiotherapy | Sham comparator | Device: Sham Transcranial Direct Current StimulationIn the sham condition, the number of sessions, placement of electrodes, and types of electrodes used will be the same, however, only a 30 second ramp up period will be administered to emulate active tDCS therapy. Patients will be able to hear the sounds of the device and will feel slight tingling for the first 30 seconds but will receive no active stimulation. Previous sham studies have demonstrated efficacy of the blinding method. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Diagnosed with cervicogenic headaches based on International Headache Society Guidelines lasting greater than 12 weeks
- The International Headache Society Guidelines are as follows: A) Presence of a headache fulfilling criterion C; B) Clinical and/or imaging evidence of a disorder or lesion within the cervical spine or soft tissues of the neck, known to be able to cause headache; C) Evidence of causation demonstrated by at least two of the following: (a) Headache has developed in temporal relation to the onset of the cervical disorder or appearance of the lesion; (b) Headache has significantly improved or resolved in parallel with improvement in or resolution of the cervical disorder or lesion; (c) Cervical range of motion is reduced and headache is made significantly worse by provocative maneuvers; (d) Headache is abolished following diagnostic blockade of a cervical structure or its nerve supply.
- Average pain score ≥ 4/10 and Neck Disability score ≥ 28/50
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Known cervical spine pathology (such as tumours or fractures)
- Nerve root pain/sensory loss
- Muscular or joint inflammatory conditions
- Neurological or psychiatric conditions
- Undergone recent surgery (within prior year)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Transcranial Direct Current StimulationSee treatment arm description | Device | Active tDCS with physiotherapy |
| Sham Transcranial Direct Current StimulationSee sham comparator arm description | Device | Sham tDCS with physiotherapy |
Primary outcome
Feasibility of tDCS through recruitment rate, retention rate in the study, and adherence rates to both tDCS and exercise therapy.
Time frame: To be assessed throughout the 6 weeks of treatment and at post-treatment follow-up.
The feasibility of tDCS will be measured through the rate of participants contacted vs those actually enrolled (expected to be greater than 30%), through rate of those enrolled vs those completing 6-weeks of treatment (expected to be greater than 80% retained), and through rates of those who completed all 18 tDCS sessions in 6-weeks as well as the percentage of exercise therapy sessions completed within the 6-week study period (expected to be greater than 70% for both).
Safety of tDCS through adverse events and transient changes in adverse effects within each tDCS session.
Time frame: To be assessed throughout the 6 weeks of treatment up to the post-treatment follow-up.
The safety of tDCS will primarily be measured through tracking rates of serious adverse effects (defined as events requiring medical attention), to be considered safe we expect 0 events of this nature to occur. Additionally, changes in safety questionnaire scores tracking transient within-session changes were considered. Safety questionnaires ask participants to rate commonly experienced symptoms from 0-100 (0= "Not occurring", 100 = "Most severe"). The symptoms assessed are itchiness, tingling, burning sensations, headache, fatigue, nausea, and mood difficulties.
Craniocervical Flexion Test (CCFT)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Fine motor control of neck muscles will be measured via the Craniocervical Flexion Test (CCFT).
13 secondary outcomes
European Quality of Life Five Dimension (EQ-5D)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT-6)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Headache Disability Index (HDI)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
PROMIS Pain Interference Scale
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Cervical Extensor Endurance Test (CEET)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Dynamometry Neck-Strength Assessment (DNSA)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Patient health questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Generalized anxiety disorder scale 7 (GADS-7)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Cervical Flexor Endurance Test (CFET)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Range of Motion of Cervical Joints (ROM)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Manual Examination of Cervical Joints (MECJ)
Time frame: To be assessed at baseline, immediately after treatment and at 6 and 12 weeks post treatment.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Jun 2024.
- Background: PubMed 31246881Langer L, Levy C, Bayley M. Increasing Incidence of Concussion: True Epidemic or Better Recognition? J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2020 Jan/Feb;35(1):E60-E66. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000503.
- Background: PubMed 7838578Barnsley L, Lord S, Bogduk N. Whiplash injury. Pain. 1994 Sep;58(3):283-307. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(94)90123-6. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 16485074Sjaastad O, Fredriksen TA, Batnes J, Petersen HC, Bakketeig LS. Whiplash in individuals with known pre-accident, clinical neck status. J Headache Pain. 2006 Feb;7(1):9-20. doi: 10.1007/s10194-006-0270-x. Epub 2006 Feb 20.
- Background: PubMed 7931379Lord SM, Barnsley L, Wallis BJ, Bogduk N. Third occipital nerve headache: a prevalence study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1994 Oct;57(10):1187-90. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.57.10.1187.
- Background: PubMed 448382Lindblom U, Verrillo RT. Sensory functions in chronic neuralgia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1979 May;42(5):422-35. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.42.5.422.
- Background: PubMed 9950624Becser N, Sand T, Pareja JA, Zwart JA. Thermal sensitivity in unilateral headaches. Cephalalgia. 1998 Dec;18(10):675-83; discussion 657. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-2982.1998.1810675.x.
- Background: PubMed 19747657Bogduk N, Govind J. Cervicogenic headache: an assessment of the evidence on clinical diagnosis, invasive tests, and treatment. Lancet Neurol. 2009 Oct;8(10):959-68. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70209-1.
- Background: PubMed 11403743Bogduk N. Cervicogenic headache: anatomic basis and pathophysiologic mechanisms. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2001 Aug;5(4):382-6. doi: 10.1007/s11916-001-0029-7.
- Background: PubMed 11903282Dumas JP, Arsenault AB, Boudreau G, Magnoux E, Lepage Y, Bellavance A, Loisel P. Physical impairments in cervicogenic headache: traumatic vs. nontraumatic onset. Cephalalgia. 2001 Nov;21(9):884-93. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-2982.2001.00264.x.
- Background: PubMed 29200944Manchikanti L, Pampati V, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. Cost Utility Analysis of Cervical Therapeutic Medial Branch Blocks in Managing Chronic Neck Pain. Int J Med Sci. 2017 Oct 15;14(13):1307-1316. doi: 10.7150/ijms.20755. eCollection 2017.
- Background: PubMed 27065472Frazer A, Williams J, Spittles M, Rantalainen T, Kidgell D. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex increases cortical voluntary activation and neural plasticity. Muscle Nerve. 2016 Nov;54(5):903-913. doi: 10.1002/mus.25143. Epub 2016 May 20.
- Background: PubMed 25996937Rroji O, van Kuyck K, Nuttin B, Wenderoth N. Anodal tDCS over the Primary Motor Cortex Facilitates Long-Term Memory Formation Reflecting Use-Dependent Plasticity. PLoS One. 2015 May 21;10(5):e0127270. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127270. eCollection 2015.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Cervicogenic Headache
Not yet recruiting
Trigger Point Injection and Myofascial Release for Cervicogenic Headache
Cervicogenic Headache
Not yet recruiting
Comparative Effects of Dynamic Cupping and Facilitated Positional Release in Cervicogenic Headache
Cervicogenic Headache
Active, not recruiting
The Role Of Fascia And Breathing Exercises In The Treatment Of Cervicogenic Headache
Cervicogenic Headache
Recruiting
Clinical Study of Myofascial Trigger Points(MTrPs) Injection in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis(OA)
Myofascial Trigger Points, Migraine
Recruiting
Comparative Effects of Post Isometric Relaxation and Reciprocal Inhibition in Individuals With Cervicogenic Headache.
Post Traumatic Headache, Cervicogenic Headache
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.
Chantel T Debert, MD MSc FRCPC CSCN principal investigator
University of Calgary
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in people with Cervicogenic Headache, run by University of Calgary at 1 site in Canada.
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 3 inclusion and 6 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 27 Jun 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Feasibility of tDCS through recruitment rate, retention rate in the study, and adherence rates to both tDCS and exercise therapy. (time frame: To be assessed throughout the 6 weeks of treatment and at post-treatment follow-up.). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT05582616, which also lists 44 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 27 Jun 2024.