Open AccessTranscranial Direct Current Stimulation in the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review
Author(s) -
Carolina Gabriela Divino Soares Gioia,
Caio de Almeida Lellis,
Caio Reis Borges,
Camila Puton,
Giovanna Garcia de Oliveira,
Ledismar José da Silva
Publication year - 2021
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Conference proceedings
DOI - 10.5327/1516-3180.264
Subject(s) - transcranial direct current stimulation , randomized controlled trial , physical medicine and rehabilitation , physical therapy , medicine , systematic review , low back pain , chronic pain , clinical trial , transcranial magnetic stimulation , stimulation , balance (ability) , medline , alternative medicine , surgery , pathology , political science , law
Chronic Low Back Pain is a condition associated with changes in different brain regions, related to pain, posture and emotions. Objectives: Review the current literature about the efficiency and safety of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in the management of Chronic Low Back Pain. Design and setting: This is a systematic review of the literature conducted at the Pontifical Catholic University of Goiás. Methods: A systematic review of literature was conducted in the PubMed, BVS and Lilacs databases, with the following research strategy: “(Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation or TDCS) and (Low Back Pain)”. Randomized studies, clinical trials and case reports published in the last 10 years were selected. Results: A clinical trial showed that TDCS of the primary motor cortex (M1) for 20 minutes improved posture, balance and pain intensity of patients with CLBP. Also, a randomized clinical trial concluded that this technique, at 2-mA intensity, showed a significant reduction in CLBP. On the other hand, two randomized clinical trials showed that the results obtained did not support the application of the TDCS method for the treatment of CLBP, since the observed groups did not show considerable difference after stimulation. In addition, another double-blind controlled study also showed that TDCS over M1 did not influence the quality of patients’ CLBP. Conclusion: A conflict was noticed between the conclusions of the articles used to compose this review, that’s why more studies with scientific rigor are needed.