Poster Presentation Asia Pacific Stroke Conference 2024

Non-invasive brain stimulation in the treatment of post-stroke aphasia: a scoping review (#419)

Ellen Williams 1 2 , Sabrina Sghirripa 1 2 , Nigel C Rogasch 1 2 3 , Brenton Hordacre 4 , Stacie Attrill 5
  1. School of Biomedicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
  2. Hopwood Centre for Neurobiology, Lifelong Health Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI), Adelaide, Australia
  3. Turner Institute of Brain and Mental Health, School of Psychological Sciences, , Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
  4. Innovation, IMPlementation and Clinical Translation (IIMPACT) in Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
  5. Speech Pathology, School of Allied Health Science and Practice, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia

Background
Aphasia is an acquired language impairment that commonly results from stroke. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) might accelerate aphasia recovery trajectories and has seen mounting popularity in recent aphasia rehabilitation research. The present review aimed to: 1) summarise all existing literature on NIBS as a post-stroke aphasia treatment; and 2) provide recommendations for future NIBS-aphasia research.

Methods
Databases for published and grey literature were searched using scoping review methodology. 278 journal articles, conference abstracts/posters, and books, and 38 items of grey literature, were included for analysis.

Results
Quantitative analysis revealed that ipsilesional anodal transcranial direct current stimulation and contralesional 1-Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation were the most widely used forms of NIBS, while qualitative analysis identified four key themes including: the roles of the hemispheres in aphasia recovery and their relationship with NIBS; heterogeneity of individuals and homogeneity of subpopulations; individualisation of stimulation parameters; and the unknown of NIBS.

Conclusion
Taken together, results from quantitative and qualitative analysis highlighted systemic challenges across the field such as small sample sizes, inter-individual variability, lack of protocol optimisation/standardisation, and inadequate focus on aphasiology. Four key recommendations are outlined to guide future research and refine NIBS methods for post-stroke aphasia treatment.