Parkinson's Disease and ParkinsonismNCT06350617
Personalized rTMS Protocol Based on Functional Reserve to Enhance Ambulatory Function in PD Patients
A study testing High-Frequency, ipsilateral M1, High-Frequency, bilateral M1 and High-Frequency, Lt. DLPFC in people with Parkinson's Disease and Parkinsonism, run by Samsung Medical Center at 1 site in South Korea.
Trial summary
The objective of this study was to determine the effects of protocols of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) therapy based on the functional reserve of each patient with Parkinson's disease, compared to conventional high-frequency rTMS therapy on bilateral primary motor cortex (M1). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 50 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Parkinson's Disease and Parkinsonism
- What is being tested?
- High-Frequency, ipsilateral M1, High-Frequency, bilateral M1 and High-Frequency, Lt. DLPFC
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSouth Korea
- Study dates
- 20 Feb 2024to 30 Sep 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 50 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- patients with Parkinson's disease, diagnosed by the United Kingdom (UK) Parkinson's Disease Society Brain Bank Diagnostic Criteria,
- Modified Hoehn and Yahr (H\&Y) scale, stage 2~4,
- patients who can walk on flat surfaces without the need for a gait aid,
- aged ≥50 years old,
- patients willing to sign the informed consent.
Who cannot join
- those with contraindications to rTMS, such as epilepsy, implanted metal objects in the head, or a history of craniotomy,
- those with cognitive impairment, confirmed through the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test as follows: < 7 points: Illiterate < 13 points: Education duration 0.5-3 years < 16 points: Education duration 4-6 years < 19 points: Education duration 7-9 years < 20 points: Education duration 10 years or more
- those with coexisting neurological conditions, such as spinal cord injury or Stroke,
- those with major psychiatric disorders, such as major depression, schizophrenia, or dementia,
- those with severe on-off phenomena or severe dyskinesia, deemed by the investigators to render participation in the study inappropriate.
- those having contraindications to conduct an MRI study,
- those who are pregnant or lactating,
- patients who have refused to participate in this study.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
South Korea1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Samsung Medical Center
Seoul, 06351
Won Hyuk Chang, PhD, +82-2-3410-6068, wh.chang@samsung.com
About this study
Official title: Safety and Efficacy of Personalized Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Protocol Based on Functional Reserve to Enhance Ambulatory Function in Patients With Parkinson Disease
The objective of this study was to determine the effects of protocols of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) therapy based on the functional reserve of each patient with Parkinson's disease, compared to conventional high-frequency rTMS therapy on bilateral primary motor cortex (M1). Investigators hypothesized that the functional reserve of each patient with Parkinson's disease will be different, and therefore an appropriate simulating target for rTMS therapy is needed. In addition, this approach could be more effective compared to conventional protocols applied to patient with Parkinson's disease regardless of their severity, predicted mechanism of motor function recovery, or functional reserves.
Read the detailed description
rTMS treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease is traditionally based on stimulating the neural network of brain. The widely-used traditional rTMS treatment protocol involves high-frequency stimulation over the bilateral primary motor cortex (M1) to enhance motor and gait functions. However, concerns have arisen regarding the effect of rTMS on motor recovery in patients with Parkinson's disease. Although still subject to debate, a possible reason for the diverse results of rTMS applied is the uniform application protocol to individuals with varying pathologies and functional reserves, aimed at enhancing recovery.
Therefore, this study was aimed to determine the effects of protocols of rTMS therapy based on the functional reserve of each patient with Parkinson's disease.
Based on screening evaluations (Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), Timed Up and Go Dual Task-Cognitive (TUG-Cog)), investigators hypothesized that patients could be categorized into two groups: 1) priority in motor functional reserve, 2) priority in cognitive functional reserve. For each group, investigators plan to randomly assign patients to experimental and control groups to demonstrate the efficacy of different rTMS protocols based on functional reserves compared to conventional high-frequency rTMS applied to the bilateral M1.
- Conditions
- Parkinson's Disease and Parkinsonism
- Being tested
- High-Frequency, ipsilateral M1, High-Frequency, bilateral M1, High-Frequency, Lt. DLPFC
- Keywords
- Parkinson's Disease, rTMS, Functional reserve
- Medical subject headings
- Parkinson Disease, Parkinsonian Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
High-Frequency, ipsilateral M1Device
rTMS intervention: 20 sessions of 10-Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold (RMT), 50 pulses per session with a 25-second interval between sessions, totaling 1,000 pulses.
rTMS target: ipsilateral primary motor cortex of lower extremity.
Total rTMS sessions: once a day, 5 days per 2 weeks, for 4 weeks, totaling 10 sessions.
Additional treatment: Treadmill gait training after the intervention, as well as the routine pharmacotherapy based on the guidelines for management of patients with Parkinson's disease.
High-Frequency, bilateral M1Device
rTMS intervention: 20 sessions of 10-Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold (RMT), 50 pulses per session with a 25-second interval between sessions, totaling 1,000 pulses.
rTMS target: bilateral primary motor cortex of lower extremity.
Total rTMS sessions: once a day, 5 days per 2 weeks, for 4 weeks, totaling 10 sessions.
Additional treatment: Treadmill gait training after the intervention, as well as the routine pharmacotherapy based on the guidelines for management of patients with Parkinson's disease.
High-Frequency, Lt. DLPFCDevice
rTMS intervention: 20 sessions of 10-Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold (RMT), 50 pulses per session with a 25-second interval between sessions, totaling 1,000 pulses.
rTMS target: Lt. DLPFC
Total rTMS sessions: once a day, 5 days per 2 weeks, for 4 weeks, totaling 10 sessions.
Additional treatment: Treadmill gait training after the intervention, as well as the routine pharmacotherapy based on the guidelines for management of patients with Parkinson's disease.
High-Frequency, bilateral M1Device
rTMS intervention: 20 sessions of 10-Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold (RMT), 50 pulses per session with a 25-second interval between sessions, totaling 1,000 pulses.
rTMS target: bilateral primary motor cortex of lower extremity.
Total rTMS sessions: once a day, 5 days per 2 weeks, for 4 weeks, totaling 10 sessions.
Additional treatment: Treadmill gait training after the intervention, as well as the routine pharmacotherapy based on the guidelines for management of patients with Parkinson's disease.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Ipsilateral High-Frequency | Experimental | Patients with motor priority confirmed by TUG and TUG-Cog tests.
High-frequency (HF) rTMS over more affected primary motor cortex (M1) of lower extremity will be applied. Receives: Device: High-Frequency, ipsilateral M1 |
| Bilateral High-Frequency1 | Active comparator | Patients with motor priority confirmed by TUG and TUG-Cog tests.
High-frequency (HF) rTMS over bilateral M1 of lower extremities will be applied. Receives: Device: High-Frequency, bilateral M1 |
| DLPFC High-Frequency | Experimental | Patients with cognitive priority confirmed by TUG and TUG-Cog tests.
High-frequency (HF) rTMS over Lt. dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) will be applied. Receives: Device: High-Frequency, Lt. DLPFC |
| Bilateral High-Frequency2 | Active comparator | Patients with cognitive priority confirmed by TUG and TUG-Cog tests.
High-frequency (HF) rTMS over bilateral M1 of lower extremities will be applied. Receives: Device: High-Frequency, bilateral M1 |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)
Measurement for gait function.
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Secondary outcomes (27)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)
Measurement for gait function.
Measured: From baseline T0 to During-intervention T1 (2 weeks)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)
Measurement for gait function.
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test-Cognitive (TUG-Cog)
Measurement for gait and cognitive function.
Measured: From baseline T0 to During-intervention T1 (2 weeks)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test-Cognitive (TUG-Cog)
Measurement for gait and cognitive function.
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test-Cognitive (TUG-Cog)
Measurement for gait and cognitive function.
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), Part III
Measurement for motor function of patients with Parkinson's disease. Score ranges from 0 to 132; higher score indicates more severity of disease status
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of MDS-UPDRS, Part III
Measurement for motor function of patients with Parkinson's disease. Score ranges from 0 to 132; higher score indicates more severity of disease status
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (FoG-Q)
Measurement for gait function of patients with Parkinson's disease Score ranges from 0 to 28; higher score indicates more severity of disease status
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (FoG-Q)
Measurement for gait function of patients with Parkinson's disease Score ranges from 0 to 28; higher score indicates more severity of disease status
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Digit span Test
Measurement for cognitive function
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Digit span Test
Measurement for cognitive function
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Trail making Test
Measurement for cognitive function
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Trail making Test
Measurement for cognitive function
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Gait speed)
Measurement for gait function. Gait speed (km/hr) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Gait speed)
Measurement for gait function. unit: km/hr Gait speed (km/hr) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Stride length)
Measurement for gait function Stride length (m) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Stride length)
Measurement for gait function Stride length (m) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Step count)
Measurement for gait function Step count will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Step count)
Measurement for gait function Step count will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Cadence)
Measurement for gait function Cadence (step count/min) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Cadence)
Measurement for gait function Cadence (step count/min) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Swing ratio)
Measurement for gait function Swing ratio (% of swing phase of 1 gait cycle) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Swing ratio)
Measurement for gait function Swing ratio (% of swing phase of 1 gait cycle) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Stride time)
Measurement for gait function Stride time (unit- second, time from heel strike to next heel strike) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Stride time)
Measurement for gait function Stride time (unit- second, time from heel strike to next heel strike) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Pressure distribution)
Measurement for gait function Pressure distribution (unit - pecentage, pressure distribution among heel, mild, and toe) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Pressure distribution)
Measurement for gait function Pressure distribution (unit - pecentage, pressure distribution among heel, mild, and toe) will be measured
Measured: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Apr 2024
- Study start20 Feb 2024
- Primary completion30 Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Sep 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Parkinson's Disease and ParkinsonismStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Samsung Medical CenterThe 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
- prospective, single-blind with blind observer, parallel-group design, multi-center, randomized controlled clinical trial
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Samsung Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Research Foundation of Korea, Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, Korea, Seoul National University Hospital, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, Saint Vincent's Hospital, Korea, Severance Hospital, Kumoh National Institute of Technology, NEUROPHET
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Won Hyuk Chang, Samsung Medical Center
- Investigators
- Won Hyuk Chang, PhD, Principal investigator, Samsung Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06350617
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2023-12-028
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 27 Feb 2024
- Last updated
- 28 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Yun SJ, Lee HS, Kim DH, Im S, Yoo YJ, Kim NY, Lee J, Kim D, Park HY, Yoon MJ, Kim YS, Chang WH, Seo HG. Efficacy of personalized repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation based on functional reserve to enhance ambulatory function in patients with Parkinson's disease: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2024 Aug 16;25(1):543. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08385-2.
PubMed 39152467
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Safety and Efficacy of Personalized Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Protocol Based on Functional Reserve to Enhance Ambulatory Function in Patients With Parkinson Disease
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06350617
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2023-12-028
- Conditions
- Parkinson's Disease and Parkinsonism
- Keywords
- Parkinson's Disease, rTMS, Functional reserve
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Samsung Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Research Foundation of Korea, Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, Korea, Seoul National University Hospital, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, Saint Vincent's Hospital, Korea, Severance Hospital, Kumoh National Institute of Technology, NEUROPHET
- Study start
- 20 Feb 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Sep 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 5 Apr 2024 (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.
The objective of this study was to determine the effects of protocols of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) therapy based on the functional reserve of each patient with Parkinson's disease, compared to conventional high-frequency rTMS therapy on bilateral primary motor cortex (M1). Investigators hypothesized that the functional reserve of each patient with Parkinson's disease will be different, and therefore an appropriate simulating target for rTMS therapy is needed. In addition, this approach could be more effective compared to conventional protocols applied to patient with Parkinson's disease regardless of their severity, predicted mechanism of motor function recovery, or functional reserves.
Detailed description
rTMS treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease is traditionally based on stimulating the neural network of brain. The widely-used traditional rTMS treatment protocol involves high-frequency stimulation over the bilateral primary motor cortex (M1) to enhance motor and gait functions. However, concerns have arisen regarding the effect of rTMS on motor recovery in patients with Parkinson's disease. Although still subject to debate, a possible reason for the diverse results of rTMS applied is the uniform application protocol to individuals with varying pathologies and functional reserves, aimed at enhancing recovery.
Therefore, this study was aimed to determine the effects of protocols of rTMS therapy based on the functional reserve of each patient with Parkinson's disease.
Based on screening evaluations (Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), Timed Up and Go Dual Task-Cognitive (TUG-Cog)), investigators hypothesized that patients could be categorized into two groups: 1) priority in motor functional reserve, 2) priority in cognitive functional reserve. For each group, investigators plan to randomly assign patients to experimental and control groups to demonstrate the efficacy of different rTMS protocols based on functional reserves compared to conventional high-frequency rTMS applied to the bilateral M1.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 4
- Model description
- prospective, single-blind with blind observer, parallel-group design, multi-center, randomized controlled clinical trial
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Ipsilateral High-Frequency | Experimental | Device: High-Frequency, ipsilateral M1Patients with motor priority confirmed by TUG and TUG-Cog tests. High-frequency (HF) rTMS over more affected primary motor cortex (M1) of lower extremity will be applied. |
| Bilateral High-Frequency1 | Active comparator | Device: High-Frequency, bilateral M1Patients with motor priority confirmed by TUG and TUG-Cog tests. High-frequency (HF) rTMS over bilateral M1 of lower extremities will be applied. |
| DLPFC High-Frequency | Experimental | Device: High-Frequency, Lt. DLPFCPatients with cognitive priority confirmed by TUG and TUG-Cog tests. High-frequency (HF) rTMS over Lt. dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) will be applied. |
| Bilateral High-Frequency2 | Active comparator | Device: High-Frequency, bilateral M1Patients with cognitive priority confirmed by TUG and TUG-Cog tests. High-frequency (HF) rTMS over bilateral M1 of lower extremities will be applied. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 50 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- patients with Parkinson's disease, diagnosed by the United Kingdom (UK) Parkinson's Disease Society Brain Bank Diagnostic Criteria,
- Modified Hoehn and Yahr (H\&Y) scale, stage 2~4,
- patients who can walk on flat surfaces without the need for a gait aid,
- aged ≥50 years old,
- patients willing to sign the informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- those with contraindications to rTMS, such as epilepsy, implanted metal objects in the head, or a history of craniotomy,
- those with cognitive impairment, confirmed through the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test as follows: < 7 points: Illiterate < 13 points: Education duration 0.5-3 years < 16 points: Education duration 4-6 years < 19 points: Education duration 7-9 years < 20 points: Education duration 10 years or more
- those with coexisting neurological conditions, such as spinal cord injury or Stroke,
- those with major psychiatric disorders, such as major depression, schizophrenia, or dementia,
- those with severe on-off phenomena or severe dyskinesia, deemed by the investigators to render participation in the study inappropriate.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| High-Frequency, ipsilateral M1rTMS intervention: 20 sessions of 10-Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold (RMT), 50 pulses per session with a 25-second interval between sessions, totaling 1,000 pulses. rTMS target: ipsilateral primary motor cortex of lower extremity. Total rTMS sessions: once a day, 5 days per 2 weeks, for 4 weeks, totaling 10 sessions. Additional treatment: Treadmill gait training after the intervention, as well as the routine pharmacotherapy based on the guidelines for management of patients with Parkinson's disease. | Device | Ipsilateral High-Frequency |
| High-Frequency, bilateral M1rTMS intervention: 20 sessions of 10-Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold (RMT), 50 pulses per session with a 25-second interval between sessions, totaling 1,000 pulses. rTMS target: bilateral primary motor cortex of lower extremity. Total rTMS sessions: once a day, 5 days per 2 weeks, for 4 weeks, totaling 10 sessions. Additional treatment: Treadmill gait training after the intervention, as well as the routine pharmacotherapy based on the guidelines for management of patients with Parkinson's disease. | Device | Bilateral High-Frequency1 |
| High-Frequency, Lt. DLPFCrTMS intervention: 20 sessions of 10-Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold (RMT), 50 pulses per session with a 25-second interval between sessions, totaling 1,000 pulses. rTMS target: Lt. DLPFC Total rTMS sessions: once a day, 5 days per 2 weeks, for 4 weeks, totaling 10 sessions. Additional treatment: Treadmill gait training after the intervention, as well as the routine pharmacotherapy based on the guidelines for management of patients with Parkinson's disease. | Device | DLPFC High-Frequency |
| High-Frequency, bilateral M1rTMS intervention: 20 sessions of 10-Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold (RMT), 50 pulses per session with a 25-second interval between sessions, totaling 1,000 pulses. rTMS target: bilateral primary motor cortex of lower extremity. Total rTMS sessions: once a day, 5 days per 2 weeks, for 4 weeks, totaling 10 sessions. Additional treatment: Treadmill gait training after the intervention, as well as the routine pharmacotherapy based on the guidelines for management of patients with Parkinson's disease. | Device | Bilateral High-Frequency2 |
Primary outcome
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Measurement for gait function.
27 secondary outcomes
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to During-intervention T1 (2 weeks)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test-Cognitive (TUG-Cog)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to During-intervention T1 (2 weeks)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test-Cognitive (TUG-Cog)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test-Cognitive (TUG-Cog)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), Part III
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of MDS-UPDRS, Part III
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (FoG-Q)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of New Freezing of Gait Questionnaire (FoG-Q)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Digit span Test
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Digit span Test
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Trail making Test
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Trail making Test
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Gait speed)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Gait speed)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Stride length)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Stride length)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Step count)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Step count)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Cadence)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Cadence)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Swing ratio)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Swing ratio)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Stride time)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Stride time)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Pressure distribution)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)
Differences of Gait lab parameter (Pressure distribution)
Time frame: From baseline T0 to Follow-up T3 (2 months)
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Apr 2026.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39152467Yun SJ, Lee HS, Kim DH, Im S, Yoo YJ, Kim NY, Lee J, Kim D, Park HY, Yoon MJ, Kim YS, Chang WH, Seo HG. Efficacy of personalized repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation based on functional reserve to enhance ambulatory function in patients with Parkinson's disease: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2024 Aug 16;25(1):543. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08385-2.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Parkinson's Disease and Parkinsonism
Recruiting
Investigating Basal Ganglia-Cortical Physiology During Sleep and Its Modulation by Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson Disease
Parkinson's Disease (PD)
Not yet recruiting
Cognitive-Motor Training for Gait Adaptability in Parkinson Disease
Parkinson Disease
RecruitingPhase 2
A Phase 2 Study and Open-Label Extension of NEU-411 in Companion Diagnostic-Positive Participants With Early Parkinson's Disease
Parkinson Disease, Parkinson
Recruiting
Strength and Dual-Task on Sarcopenia in People With Parkinson's Disease
PARKINSON DISEASE (Disorder), Parkinsonism or Parkinson's Disease Nos
Recruiting
Dual Tasking Training to Enhance Self-Efficacy in Individuals With Parkinson's Disease
Parkinson´s Disease
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.
Won Hyuk Chang, PhD principal investigator
Samsung Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing High-Frequency, ipsilateral M1, High-Frequency, bilateral M1 and High-Frequency, Lt. DLPFC in people with Parkinson's Disease and Parkinsonism, run by Samsung Medical Center at 1 site in South Korea.
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 5 inclusion and 8 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Apr 2026. 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 South Korea. 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.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Won Hyuk Chang, PhD (+82-2-3410-6068, wh.chang@samsung.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Differences of Timed Up and Go Test (TUG) (time frame: From baseline T0 to Post-intervention T2 (4 weeks)). 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 NCT06350617, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 28 Apr 2026.