Ipsilesional 5 Hz Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Motor Dysfunction in Subacute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: An Exploratory Trial.
Juan Xiao, Yan Sun, Ze-Jian Liu and 3 others
PMID 40463781WHAT IT FOUND
Patients receiving 5 Hz rTMS alongside standard rehab showed greater motor recovery than those receiving standard rehab alone.
The added treatment was safe, but because the control group did not receive a sham procedure, the extra time and attention may explain some of the improvement.
Key findings
01The experimental group received 5 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in addition to conventional rehabilitation, while the control group received conventional rehabilitation only.
02The trial was randomized and single-blinded, meaning only the evaluators were unaware of group assignment, not the patients or therapists.
03No significant discomfort or adverse reactions such as epilepsy or headache were reported during the treatment period or at follow-up.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was single-blinded, meaning patients and therapists knew who received rTMS, which introduces the risk of placebo effect or differential effort. The control group did not receive a sham stimulation or equivalent extra time, so the 36-minute daily rTMS session represents a significant difference in treatment dosage that may account for part of the observed benefit. The follow-up period was short, lasting only one month after treatment ended, so long-term effects are unknown. The sample size was small (49 participants) and the study was exploratory, limiting the certainty of the findings. Patients with severe cognitive or communication disorders were excluded, so the results may not apply to the most severely impaired patients.
Declared interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work.
The easy way to misread this
Do not attribute all the motor improvements solely to the magnetic stimulation. The rTMS group received 36 minutes of additional daily treatment that the control group did not receive, and neither group was blinded to the intervention, so the benefit may partly reflect the extra time and attention rather than the specific effect of rTMS.