We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Insufficient efficacy of conventional treatment of auditory hallucinations (AH) in schizophrenia supports rising interest to brain stimulation techniques including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Left temporo-parietal cortex (TP3) is involved in emergence of AH, thus neuromodulation of this area might be reasonable.
Objectives
Comparison of efficacy and tolerability of 2 protocols of TMS (1 Hz and cTBS) over TP3 and sham-TMS for treatment resistant AH in schizophrenia.
Methods
76 schizophrenia (ICD-10 - F20) patients with prominent AH (PANSS P3 ≥ 4, AHRS ≥ 15), who had failed to respond to previous antipsychotic treatment, were randomized into 3 groups: 1) 1 Hz TMS (30 patients); 2) cTBS (25 patients); 3) Sham-TMS (21 patients). Sessions were performed 5 days a week for 3 weeks. Antipsychotic medication was continued throughout the study. Patients were assessed weekly with PANSS, AHRS, CDSS, CGI-S by blinded raters. The criterion of efficacy was 30% AHRS score reduction after 3 weeks of treatment.
Results
The number of responders were 13 (43,3%) in 1 Hz TMS group, 14 (56%) – in cTBS group, 4 (19,1%) in sham-TMS group. There was no statistically significant difference in efficacy between 1 Hz TMS and cTBS, but each of the active protocols was more effective than sham-TMS. Treatment was generally well tolerated in all groups, nobody was discontinued the study due to adverse events.
Conclusions
Both protocols of TMS (1 Hz and cTBS) over TP3 are safe and effective in the treatment of schizophrenic patients with pharmacotherapy resistant AH. Further studies are needed.
Disclosure
No significant relationships.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.