Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:59:46.641Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A sham-controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of twice-daily rTMS in major depression

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 December 2006

COLLEEN K. LOO
Affiliation:
School of Psychiatry, University of NSW and Black Dog Institute, Sydney, Australia
PHILIP B. MITCHELL
Affiliation:
School of Psychiatry, University of NSW and Black Dog Institute, Sydney, Australia
TARA F. McFARQUHAR
Affiliation:
School of Psychiatry, University of NSW and Black Dog Institute, Sydney, Australia
GIN S. MALHI
Affiliation:
School of Psychiatry, University of NSW and Black Dog Institute, Sydney, Australia
PERMINDER S. SACHDEV
Affiliation:
School of Psychiatry, University of NSW and Black Dog Institute, Sydney, Australia

Abstract

Background. Studies of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in depression have mostly involved once-daily treatment, with positive but modest clinical results. This study tested the efficacy and safety of twice-daily rTMS over 2 weeks.

Method. Thirty-eight depressed subjects enrolled in a double-blind, sham-controlled trial of twice-daily rTMS (left prefrontal cortex, 10 Hz, 110% intensity, 1500 stimuli per session) over 2 weeks. Mood and neuropsychological functioning were assessed weekly by blind raters, using the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) as the primary outcome measure, plus the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) and self-report measures. After the blind period, 22 subjects continued with once-daily rTMS to receive a total of 6 weeks of active rTMS.

Results. Subjects were moderately treatment resistant. Active treatment resulted in significantly greater improvement than sham over the 2-week blind period on one outcome measure only (MADRS p<0·05). Subjects showed further improvement over the 6 weeks of active rTMS. Neuropsychological test scores did not change significantly.

Conclusions. rTMS given twice daily was effective and safe, with no adverse neuropsychological effects.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
2006 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)