Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) in chronic pain patients: Effects on daily-reported symptoms - 21/12/25
, Jorge Alcántara-Espinosa b, Lara Rubal-Otero a, c, Mónica Mayo-Moldes d, Noelia Samartin-Veiga a, María Teresa Carrillo-de-la-Peña aHighlights |
• | Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) significantly reduced daily-reported pain intensity in chronic pain patients. |
• | All clinical indices, except sleep quality, improved after tES (15 sessions). |
• | Transcranial stimulation with direct (tDCS) or alternate current (tACS) produced similar results, superior to sham. |
• | Inclusion of daily reports of outcome variables, assessed by time series analysis, can improve the design of clinical trials. |
• | Home-based tES proved to be an effective, feasible procedure for the management of chronic pain. |
Abstract |
Background |
Transcranial electrical stimulation has yielded positive results for relieving pain in patients with chronic pain (CP), but the existing evidence is insufficient. In order to address some gaps in the literature, we conducted a randomized, double blind, sham-controlled clinical trial aimed at evaluating the feasibility and efficacy of home-based neurostimulation in a sample of 120 patients.
Methods |
The patients completed 15 self-administered home-based sessions of either transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS, n = 48), transcranial alternate current stimulation (tACS, n = 48), or sham stimulation (n = 24). The primary outcome variable, i.e., pain intensity, and related variables were assessed online (using numerical rating scales from 0 to 10) throughout 45 days (pre-treatment, treatment, and post-treatment periods each of 15 days).
Results |
ANOVA (classical and Bayesian frameworks) and time series analysis consistently showed that both tDCS and tACS decreased the patients’ daily reported pain intensity (tDCS: tau = −0.553; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = −0.563; p < 0.001), pain unpleasantness (tDCS: tau = −0.489; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = −0.537; p < 0.001), interference due to pain (tDCS: tau = −0.368; p < 0.001; tACS: tau = −0.424; p < 0.001), and other symptoms such as fatigue (tDCS: tau = −0.255; p = 0.02; tACS: tau = −0.556; p < 0.001) and stress/anxiety (tDCS: tau = −0.245; p = 0.02; tACS: tau = −0.685; p < 0.001). No such improvement was observed in the group receiving the sham stimulation. The home-based treatment was associated with low drop-out rates (6.66%) and moderate satisfaction with the procedure (around 5 out of 10 in all groups), and minimal adverse effects of transcranial electrical stimulation were reported.
Conclusions |
tDCS and tACS significantly reduced daily-reported pain in chronic pain patients. Home-based intervention could significantly reduce the high economic burden associated with chronic pain management in healthcare systems. Inclusion of daily reports assessed by time series analysis can improve clinical trials in the field of chronic pain.
Study registration |
ClinicalTrials.gov ID number: NCT05099406 ( NCT05099406?term=NCT05099406%20%26rank=1 )
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Chronic pain, Transcranial electrical stimulation, Clinical trial, Home-based intervention, Time series analysis
Plan
Vol 45 - N° 1
Article 101613- janvier 2026 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid resistance in the first postoperative pneumonia after cardiac surgery: Risk factors and outcomes from a 10-year cohort analysis
- David Kovacs, Mohamed Rekik, Marie Lavollay, Fabrice Compain, Chahrazad Bey Boumezrag, Konstantinos Zannis, Christophe Caussin, Elodie Teil, Kamel Bouabdallah, Clarisse Blayau, Paul-Henri Wicky, Nicolas Allou, Marc Beaussier, Mathieu Desmard, Alexy Tran-Dinh, on behalf of the Heart Team IMM study group
- Prevalence of perioperative functional disability using WHODAS 2.0 and associated adverse outcomes in surgical populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- Priyanjli Sharma, Ellene Yan, Andy Cui, Rihana Kukkadi, Emily Au, Marina Englesakis, Frances Chung
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?