BackgroundMany double-blind clinical trials of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) use stimulus intensities of 2 mA despite the fact that blinding has not been formally validated under these conditions. The aim of this study was to test the assumption that sham 2 mA tDCS achieves effective blinding.MethodsA randomised double blind crossover trial. 100 tDCS-naïve healthy volunteers were incorrectly advised that they there were taking part in a trial of tDCS on word memory. Participants attended for two separate sessions. In each session, they completed a word memory task, then received active or sham tDCS (order randomised) at 2 mA stimulation intensity for 20 minutes and then repeated the word memory task. They then judged whether they believed they had received active stimulation and rated their confidence in that judgement. The blinded assessor noted when red marks were observed at the electrode sites post-stimulation.ResultstDCS at 2 mA was not effectively blinded. That is, participants correctly judged the stimulation condition greater than would be expected to by chance at both the first session (kappa level of agreement (κ) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.47 p = 0.005) and the second session (κ = 0.77, 95%CI 0.64 to 0.90), p = <0.001) indicating inadequate participant blinding. Redness at the reference electrode site was noticeable following active stimulation more than sham stimulation (session one, κ = 0.512, 95%CI 0.363 to 0.66, p<0.001; session two, κ = 0.677, 95%CI 0.534 to 0.82) indicating inadequate assessor blinding.ConclusionsOur results suggest that blinding in studies using tDCS at intensities of 2 mA is inadequate. Positive results from such studies should be interpreted with caution.

Purpose:To determine the benefits for patients who received an Electric Powered Indoor/outdoor Chair (EPIOC) and to quantify their perceived changes to their quality of life. Method:Community-based cohort study of all patients provided with an EPIOC over 4 months; and followed up about 3 months later in a community served by a regional wheelchair service in North West London (population about 3.1 million) using the EuroQol EQ-5D with visual analogue scales for each of the 5 dimensions of the EQ-5D.Results: Sixty-four wheelchair users were assessed initially and 51 completed follow up. Chair users showed no significant improvement in health state as measured by the EQ-5D after EPIOC provision. The visual analogue scales (VASs) indicated that, although perceived overall health state, independence and social life did not appear to improve, the dimensions of mobility, quality of life and pain/discomfort improved significantly on provision of an EPIOC.Conclusion: EPIOC users reported significant improvements in several important aspects of their lives; not just in mobility (as expected) but also in reduction of painPowered wheelchairs and quality of life 3 and discomfort. The use of VASs provided a more holistic set of outcome measures that demonstrate quality of life benefits beyond that of health state alone.Powered wheelchairs and quality of life 4

At short-term, intervention is more effective than advice on staying active, leading to more rapid improvement in function, mood, quality of life, and general health. The timing of intervention affects the development of psychosocial features. If treatment is provided later, the same psychosocial benefits are not achieved. Therefore, an assess/advise/treat model of care seems to offer better outcomes than an assess/advise/wait model of care.

Self-care practices were widespread, and those most commonly used could be identified. This survey method allows the views and priorities of this consumer group to be revealed. The information obtained can be used to develop services where the professional guides and encourages appropriate self-management based upon the issues that people with MS consider to be most important.

These results do not provide evidence that tDCS is effective in the treatment of chronic back pain. The use of a small convenience sample limits the generalizability of these findings and precludes definitive conclusions on the efficacy of tDCS in chronic nonspecific low back pain.