DSS: rTMS and Retraining in Focal Hand Dystonia

Sponsor
University of Minnesota (Other)
Overall Status
Completed
CT.gov ID
NCT01738581
Collaborator
(none)
9
2
2
43
4.5
0.1

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

This study is exploring a new experimental procedure in dystonia called repetitive transcranial magnetic brain stimulation (TMS) combined with rehabilitation. The purpose of the study is to determine whether repetitive TMS is effective as a treatment to reduce symptoms in dystonia as demonstrated by improved motor performance.

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
  • Device: Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
  • Behavioral: Sensorimotor Retraining
  • Behavioral: Non-specific Therapy
Phase 1/Phase 2

Detailed Description

BACKGROUND: Though the etiology of focal hand dystonia (FHD) is uncertain, two primary factors implicated in the development of dystonic symptoms are excessive cortical excitability and impaired sensorimotor processing.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the functional efficacy and neural effects of a Dual intervention of rTMS and sensorimotor retraining. Our working hypothesis is: subjects receiving the combined intervention will (1) display significantly improved handwriting measures; (2) report significant improvement in daily functional ability; (3) display reduced hand cramping compared; and (4) demonstrate reduced corticospinal excitability after the Dual intervention when compared to the rTMS+ stretching and massage (Sham) intervention.

METHODS: A randomized, single-subject, multiple baseline design with crossover is used for this study that will examine ten subjects with FHD with two interventions: five days of low-frequency 1 Hz rTMS + sensorimotor retraining (Dual intervention) vs. rTMS + stretching and massage (Sham). The rTMS is applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 90% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed.

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Actual Enrollment :
9 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Crossover Assignment
Masking:
Single (Outcomes Assessor)
Primary Purpose:
Treatment
Official Title:
Effectiveness of rTMS and Retraining in the Treatment of Focal Hand Dystonia
Study Start Date :
Nov 1, 2011
Actual Primary Completion Date :
Jun 1, 2015
Actual Study Completion Date :
Jun 1, 2015

Arms and Interventions

Arm Intervention/Treatment
Experimental: rTMS + SMR, then rTMS + CTL

First phase of treatment: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and sensorimotor retraining (SMR). Second phase of treatment: rTMS and control treatment (CTL) (CTL therapy consisted of non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion).

Device: Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 90% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
Other Names:
  • Magstim stimulator (Magstim Co. LTD, Whitland,UK)
  • Neuromodulation
  • Behavioral: Sensorimotor Retraining
    For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed
    Other Names:
  • Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program,
  • Sensory and motor Retraining
  • Behavioral: Non-specific Therapy
    A non-specific massage and stretching program directed to the hand, wrist and forearm
    Other Names:
  • Massage
  • Stretching
  • Experimental: rTMS + CTL, then rTMS + SMR

    First phase of treatment: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion. Second phase of treatment: rTMS and sensorimotor retraining (SMR).

    Device: Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
    Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 90% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Other Names:
  • Magstim stimulator (Magstim Co. LTD, Whitland,UK)
  • Neuromodulation
  • Behavioral: Sensorimotor Retraining
    For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed
    Other Names:
  • Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program,
  • Sensory and motor Retraining
  • Behavioral: Non-specific Therapy
    A non-specific massage and stretching program directed to the hand, wrist and forearm
    Other Names:
  • Massage
  • Stretching
  • Outcome Measures

    Primary Outcome Measures

    1. Change From Baseline in Global Rating of Change at Posttest (Day 5) [Baseline and Posttest]

      Symptom severity was assessed using the global rating of change (GROC). For the GROC, participants were asked to identify between one to three functions most impacted by focal hand dystonia. At posttest 1 they were then asked to select a rating of perceived change that represented the level of function compared to baseline. Perceived change consisted of a ±7 point Likert scale (+7= a very great deal better, 0= no change, -7= a very great deal worse).

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    1. Change From Baseline in Arm Dystonia Disability Scale at Posttest (Day 5) [Baseline and Posttest]

      The Arm Dystonia Disability Scale (ADDS) is a survey where participants rate task difficulty for activities such as writing, handling utensils, and buttoning on a scale of 1-4 (1 = no difficulty ,4 = not able or marked difficulty). This is a subjective assessment of impairment due to focal hand dystonia. Scores are determined using an equation: total points scored, divided by the maximum possible (23), multiplied by the quotient by 90 and subtract from 90%. Scores range from 0%-90% with higher scores indicating more function.

    2. Change From Baseline in Sensation at Posttest (Day 5) [Baseline and Posttest]

      Examinations included two point discrimination. Two-point discrimination threshold was completed using a Disk-Criminator™. Participants were asked to reply "one" or "two" after each presentation. Static and dynamic stimuli were presented to the index and ring fingers bilaterally, meaning it was presented as a static stimuli or it was slowly swept across the skin (dynamic).

    3. Change From Baseline in Cortical Silent Period at Posttest (Day 5) [Baseline and Posttest]

      Cortical silent period (CSP) testing was completed during an isometric contraction of the target muscle whereby the motor evoked potential is followed by a short duration of electromyographic quiescence. The maximal voluntary contraction for finger abduction was recorded using a custom strain gauge placed around the index finger. Real-time visual feedback was given on a laptop screen to project the force produced by the participant and 20% of the maximum of three trials was calculated and displayed on a target line. For the CSP, participants were asked to contract until the target line was met, then a single transcranial magnetic stimulation pulse was delivered to the motor cortex. Ten trials were collected with a short rest period to prevent fatigue. CSP duration was calculated in milliseconds (ms). CSP EMG data were first rectified, and then a 10-ms moving average calculation was applied to the data. The onset of the CSP was set as the time point of the delivery of the TM

    4. Change From Baseline for Pressure During Hand Writing at Posttest (Day 5) [Baseline and Posttest]

      Digitized handwriting was assessed using a computerized tablet (WACOM Co., Ltd., japan) with MovAlyzeR® (Neuroscript LLC, Tempe, AZ) hardware and software. Participants used a custom modified digitized pen (Kiko Software, Netherlands) to write in a self-selected pace and style on the tablet with real-time visual feedback. Writing tasks included "My country tis of thee" at a self-selected pace, repeated eight times. Data were sampled at 215 Hz (resolution: 5080 lpi, accuracy: ±0.01 pressure range: 0-800 g). Writing samples were segmented by points of minimal velocity into single strokes for analysis. Pressure for each stroke was automatically calculated within the software.

    5. Change From Baseline for Physician Rated Impairment at Posttest (Day 5) [Baseline and Posttest]

      Video recordings were made as participants wrote on a pad of paper with pen. Participants were asked to draw a series of 10 loops across the pad of paper followed by "The dog is barking" and their signature, each repeated four times. A physician blinded to participant allocation rated recordings. Scoring criteria were adapted from a standardized writer's cramp rating scale (WCRS) (Wissel et al., 1996), rating pathological flexion or extension at the wrist, fingers and elbow, presence of tremor, dystonic posture, writing speed and latency of dystonic symptoms. Final scores are expressed as a rating listed as a movement score.

    6. Change From Baseline in Physical Function at Posttest (Day 5) [Baseline and Posttest]

      Participants completed the full SF-36 assessment with subsection of interest: "physical functioning".

    Eligibility Criteria

    Criteria

    Ages Eligible for Study:
    18 Years to 75 Years
    Sexes Eligible for Study:
    All
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
    No
    Inclusion Criteria:
    • Greater than 18 years of age

    • Symptoms of focal hand dystonia or writer's cramp

    Exclusion Criteria:
    • History of seizure or other neurologic disorder

    Contacts and Locations

    Locations

    Site City State Country Postal Code
    1 University of Minnesota, Program in Physical Therapy Minneapolis Minnesota United States 55414
    2 Program in Physical Therapy, University of Minnesota Minneapolis Minnesota United States 55455

    Sponsors and Collaborators

    • University of Minnesota

    Investigators

    • Principal Investigator: Teresa J Kimberley, PhD, PT, University of Minnesota, Program in Physical Therapy

    Study Documents (Full-Text)

    None provided.

    More Information

    Publications

    Responsible Party:
    University of Minnesota
    ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
    NCT01738581
    Other Study ID Numbers:
    • 0608M91226-2
    First Posted:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Last Update Posted:
    Nov 18, 2019
    Last Verified:
    Oct 1, 2019
    Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
    No
    Plan to Share IPD:
    No
    Keywords provided by University of Minnesota
    Additional relevant MeSH terms:

    Study Results

    Participant Flow

    Recruitment Details
    Pre-assignment Detail
    Arm/Group Title rTMS + SMR, Then rTMS + CTL rTMS + CTL, Then rTMS + SMR
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and sensorimotor retraining Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Period Title: Overall Study
    STARTED 5 4
    COMPLETED 4 4
    NOT COMPLETED 1 0

    Baseline Characteristics

    Arm/Group Title rTMS + Sensorimotor Retraining, rTMS + CTL rTMS + CTL, rTMS + Sensorimotor Retraining Total
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic (rTMS) stimulation and sensorimotor retraining for the first phase, then rTMS with control therapy (CTL). CTL therapy was non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with control therapy (CTL). CTL therapy was non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion for the first phase, then rTMS with sensorimotor retraining. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Total of all reporting groups
    Overall Participants 5 4 9
    Age (years) [Mean (Standard Deviation) ]
    Mean (Standard Deviation) [years]
    48
    (13.55359731)
    44
    (6.751543034)
    46
    (10.64320336)
    Sex: Female, Male (Count of Participants)
    Female
    2
    40%
    1
    25%
    3
    33.3%
    Male
    3
    60%
    3
    75%
    6
    66.7%
    Region of Enrollment (participants) [Number]
    United States
    5
    100%
    4
    100%
    9
    100%

    Outcome Measures

    1. Primary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Global Rating of Change at Posttest (Day 5)
    Description Symptom severity was assessed using the global rating of change (GROC). For the GROC, participants were asked to identify between one to three functions most impacted by focal hand dystonia. At posttest 1 they were then asked to select a rating of perceived change that represented the level of function compared to baseline. Perceived change consisted of a ±7 point Likert scale (+7= a very great deal better, 0= no change, -7= a very great deal worse).
    Time Frame Baseline and Posttest

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    All participants who completed the first phase were included in the analysis. Data were only analyzed in the first intervention period of the study because there was a lack of a washout effect between periods. This lack of washout made data from the second intervention period unreliable.
    Arm/Group Title rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining rTMS With Control Therapy
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and sensorimotor retraining Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Measure Participants 5 4
    Mean (Full Range) [units on a scale]
    1.3
    1.2
    2. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Arm Dystonia Disability Scale at Posttest (Day 5)
    Description The Arm Dystonia Disability Scale (ADDS) is a survey where participants rate task difficulty for activities such as writing, handling utensils, and buttoning on a scale of 1-4 (1 = no difficulty ,4 = not able or marked difficulty). This is a subjective assessment of impairment due to focal hand dystonia. Scores are determined using an equation: total points scored, divided by the maximum possible (23), multiplied by the quotient by 90 and subtract from 90%. Scores range from 0%-90% with higher scores indicating more function.
    Time Frame Baseline and Posttest

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    All participants who completed the first phase were included in the analysis. Data were only analyzed in the first intervention period of the study because there was a lack of a washout effect between periods. This lack of washout made data from the second intervention period unreliable.
    Arm/Group Title rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining rTMS With Control Therapy
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and sensorimotor retraining Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Measure Participants 5 4
    Mean (Standard Deviation) [percentage of function]
    71.98
    (7.031320694)
    71.42
    (8.464086657)
    3. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Sensation at Posttest (Day 5)
    Description Examinations included two point discrimination. Two-point discrimination threshold was completed using a Disk-Criminator™. Participants were asked to reply "one" or "two" after each presentation. Static and dynamic stimuli were presented to the index and ring fingers bilaterally, meaning it was presented as a static stimuli or it was slowly swept across the skin (dynamic).
    Time Frame Baseline and Posttest

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    All participants who completed the first phase were included in the analysis. Data were only analyzed in the first intervention period of the study because there was a lack of a washout effect between periods. This lack of washout made data from the second intervention period unreliable.
    Arm/Group Title rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining rTMS With Control Therapy
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and sensorimotor retraining Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Measure Participants 5 4
    Improvement
    3
    60%
    2
    50%
    No Change
    2
    40%
    1
    25%
    Worsening
    0
    0%
    1
    25%
    4. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Cortical Silent Period at Posttest (Day 5)
    Description Cortical silent period (CSP) testing was completed during an isometric contraction of the target muscle whereby the motor evoked potential is followed by a short duration of electromyographic quiescence. The maximal voluntary contraction for finger abduction was recorded using a custom strain gauge placed around the index finger. Real-time visual feedback was given on a laptop screen to project the force produced by the participant and 20% of the maximum of three trials was calculated and displayed on a target line. For the CSP, participants were asked to contract until the target line was met, then a single transcranial magnetic stimulation pulse was delivered to the motor cortex. Ten trials were collected with a short rest period to prevent fatigue. CSP duration was calculated in milliseconds (ms). CSP EMG data were first rectified, and then a 10-ms moving average calculation was applied to the data. The onset of the CSP was set as the time point of the delivery of the TM
    Time Frame Baseline and Posttest

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    All participants who completed the first phase were included in the analysis. Data were only analyzed in the first intervention period of the study because there was a lack of a washout effect between periods. This lack of washout made data from the second intervention period unreliable.
    Arm/Group Title rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining rTMS With Control Therapy
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and sensorimotor retraining Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Measure Participants 5 4
    Improvement
    2
    40%
    1
    25%
    No Change
    2
    40%
    1
    25%
    Worsening
    1
    20%
    2
    50%
    5. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline for Pressure During Hand Writing at Posttest (Day 5)
    Description Digitized handwriting was assessed using a computerized tablet (WACOM Co., Ltd., japan) with MovAlyzeR® (Neuroscript LLC, Tempe, AZ) hardware and software. Participants used a custom modified digitized pen (Kiko Software, Netherlands) to write in a self-selected pace and style on the tablet with real-time visual feedback. Writing tasks included "My country tis of thee" at a self-selected pace, repeated eight times. Data were sampled at 215 Hz (resolution: 5080 lpi, accuracy: ±0.01 pressure range: 0-800 g). Writing samples were segmented by points of minimal velocity into single strokes for analysis. Pressure for each stroke was automatically calculated within the software.
    Time Frame Baseline and Posttest

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    One participant that did not display symptoms affecting handwriting and did not participate in the handwriting analysis. Data were only analyzed in the first intervention period of the study because there was a lack of a washout effect between periods. This lack of washout made data from the second intervention period unreliable.
    Arm/Group Title rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining rTMS With Control Therapy
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and sensorimotor retraining Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Measure Participants 5 3
    Improvement
    2
    40%
    2
    50%
    No Change
    3
    60%
    1
    25%
    Worsening
    0
    0%
    0
    0%
    6. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline for Physician Rated Impairment at Posttest (Day 5)
    Description Video recordings were made as participants wrote on a pad of paper with pen. Participants were asked to draw a series of 10 loops across the pad of paper followed by "The dog is barking" and their signature, each repeated four times. A physician blinded to participant allocation rated recordings. Scoring criteria were adapted from a standardized writer's cramp rating scale (WCRS) (Wissel et al., 1996), rating pathological flexion or extension at the wrist, fingers and elbow, presence of tremor, dystonic posture, writing speed and latency of dystonic symptoms. Final scores are expressed as a rating listed as a movement score.
    Time Frame Baseline and Posttest

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    All participants who completed the first phase were included in the analysis. Data were only analyzed in the first intervention period of the study because there was a lack of a washout effect between periods. This lack of washout made data from the second intervention period unreliable.
    Arm/Group Title rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining rTMS With Control Therapy
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and sensorimotor retraining Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Measure Participants 5 4
    Improvement
    2
    40%
    0
    0%
    No Change
    3
    60%
    3
    75%
    Worsening
    0
    0%
    1
    25%
    7. Secondary Outcome
    Title Change From Baseline in Physical Function at Posttest (Day 5)
    Description Participants completed the full SF-36 assessment with subsection of interest: "physical functioning".
    Time Frame Baseline and Posttest

    Outcome Measure Data

    Analysis Population Description
    All participants who completed the first phase were included in the analysis. Data were only analyzed in the first intervention period of the study because there was a lack of a washout effect between periods. This lack of washout made data from the second intervention period unreliable.
    Arm/Group Title rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining rTMS With Control Therapy
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and sensorimotor retraining Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses.
    Measure Participants 5 4
    Improvement
    1
    20%
    0
    0%
    No Change
    4
    80%
    2
    50%
    Worsening
    0
    0%
    2
    50%

    Adverse Events

    Time Frame Before and after each session of the intervention phase
    Adverse Event Reporting Description Participants were evaluated per-sequence due to the lack of washout effect. Each participant was asked to identify if an event occurred immediately after and the beginning of each session throughout the study. A list of common side-effects was presented to each participant to report 'yes or no' to each side effect.
    Arm/Group Title rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining, Then rTMS With CTL rTMS With CTL, Then rTMS With Sensorimotor Retrain
    Arm/Group Description Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and sensorimotor retraining for first phase, then rTMS with control (CTL) therapy. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with control (CTL) non-specific therapy that includes stretching, massage, range of motion for first phase, then rTMS with sensorimotor retraining for second phase. Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (Magstim): Applied to the premotor cortex at 1 Hz at 80% resting motor threshold for 1200 pulses. Sensorimotor Retraining: For sensorimotor retraining, a subset of the Learning-based Sensorimotor Training program was followed
    All Cause Mortality
    rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining, Then rTMS With CTL rTMS With CTL, Then rTMS With Sensorimotor Retrain
    Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
    Total / (NaN) / (NaN)
    Serious Adverse Events
    rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining, Then rTMS With CTL rTMS With CTL, Then rTMS With Sensorimotor Retrain
    Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
    Total 0/5 (0%) 0/4 (0%)
    Other (Not Including Serious) Adverse Events
    rTMS With Sensorimotor Retraining, Then rTMS With CTL rTMS With CTL, Then rTMS With Sensorimotor Retrain
    Affected / at Risk (%) # Events Affected / at Risk (%) # Events
    Total 3/5 (60%) 2/4 (50%)
    Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
    Neck Pain 0/5 (0%) 0 2/4 (50%) 2
    Nervous system disorders
    Headache 0/5 (0%) 0 2/4 (50%) 8
    Decreased balance 2/5 (40%) 2 0/4 (0%) 0
    Psychiatric disorders
    Abnormal Sleep Pattern 1/5 (20%) 2 0/4 (0%) 0
    Mood change 1/5 (20%) 1 0/4 (0%) 0

    Limitations/Caveats

    Small sample size may have underpowered the study. The high variance seen in our single subject analysis is not unusual as a current conundrum in neuromodulation is the variable response between subjects to many different types of neuromodulation.

    More Information

    Certain Agreements

    All Principal Investigators ARE employed by the organization sponsoring the study.

    There is NOT an agreement between Principal Investigators and the Sponsor (or its agents) that restricts the PI's rights to discuss or publish trial results after the trial is completed.

    Results Point of Contact

    Name/Title Dr. Teresa Kimberley
    Organization University of Minnesota
    Phone 612-626-4096
    Email tjk@umn.edu
    Responsible Party:
    University of Minnesota
    ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
    NCT01738581
    Other Study ID Numbers:
    • 0608M91226-2
    First Posted:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Last Update Posted:
    Nov 18, 2019
    Last Verified:
    Oct 1, 2019