Skip to content

Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation in Back Pain- Pilot Sudy

Effect of Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Pilot Study

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03243084
Acronym
BPS
Enrollment
21
Registered
2017-08-08
Start date
2017-09-07
Completion date
2018-01-10
Last updated
2018-12-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Chronic Low Back Pain

Keywords

tACS, transcranial alternating current stimulation, low back pain, chronic pain, alpha oscillations, heart rate variability

Brief summary

Chronic pain is a severe disabling problem within society, affecting 25-30% of the United States population.. Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) has the potential to provide a treatment option that is safe, scientifically-supported, low-cost, and easy-to-administer method to effectively reduce symptoms in patients suffering from chronic pain. The purpose of this study is to test the feasibility of using tACS to treat patients with chronic pain, and to collect pilot efficacy as well as EEG and EKG biomarker data for optimizing the design of subsequent large-scale studies. The treatment rationale is to renormalize the presumed pathological structure of alpha oscillations in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) of patients with chronic pain.

Interventions

The participant will receive up to one minute of tACS stimulation until the stimulation fades. Sham stimulation mimics the skin sensations a participant would experience during a tACS session

Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is a method of noninvasive brain stimulation in which weak electrical current are applied to the scalp in a sine wave pattern to induce cortical oscillations at the frequency at which they are applied

Sponsors

National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
CollaboratorNIH
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Masking description

This is a double-blind study, meaning that neither the participant nor the experimenter knows what kind of stimulation the participant is receiving. An unblinded monitor (separate from the staff that interacts with the participant) is responsible for creating the stimulation codes that run each session and for ensuring that these codes worked correctly.

Intervention model description

Each participant will receive sham stimulation and 10Hz tACS stimulation at two separate sessions. The order will be randomized (ie, half the participants will receive sham stimulation at the first session and 10Hz tACS stimulation at the second session, and the other half will receive 10Hz tACS stimulation at the first session and sham stimulation at the second session).

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Male or female, aged 18-65 * Diagnosed with nonspecific chronic low back pain by clinician * BMI is less than 30 * Suffered from chronic pain for \> 6 months * Self-report pain measures \>4 * Meets criteria for low depression and suicide risk as defined by the Hamilton-Depression Rating Scale * Capacity to understand all relevant risks and potential benefits of the study (informed consent) * Not currently taking opioids, benzodiazepines, and anticonvulsant medications

Exclusion criteria

* Radicular Pain * Traumatic brain injury, Any brain devices/implants, including cochlear implants and aneurysm clips * History of major neurological or psychiatric illness, including epilepsy * (For females) Pregnancy or breast feeding * Diagnosis of eating disorder (current or within the past 6 months), Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (lifetime), or Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (currently under treatment)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Heart Rate Variability Before and After 40-minute Stimulationbefore and after 40-minute stimulation at each sessionChanges in parasympathetic tone, increase in high frequency band input via spectral analysis on EKG recordings between active and sham stimulation
Change in Electroencephalogram Power in Alpha Band Before and After 40-minute Stimulation5 minute recordings before and after each 40-minute stimulation at each session.Changes in the EEG power in the alpha (8-12 Hz) band before and after 40-minute stimulation

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Pain Rating on the Visual Analog Scale Before and After 40-minute Stimulationbefore and after 40 minute stimulation sessionSelf reported pain rating using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from 0-10 done before and after stimulation with '0' being no pain and '10' as bad as it could be. Lower values represent a better outcome. (Pain difference was normalized using modulation index to account for ordinal scale)

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Recruitment ran from August 2017 - December 2017. This clinical trial utilized multiple recruitment strategies including UNC University Physical Therapy and Pain clinic locations, informational notify.unc.edu system, and jointheconquest.org along with the listing on clinicaltrials.gov

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Sham Then Active 10 Hz tACS
At session 1 this group received sham tACS and at session 2 they received active 10Hz tACS
11
Active 10 Hz Then Sham tACS
At session 1 this group received active 10Hz tACS and at session 2 they received sham 10Hz tACS
10
Total21

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Washout (1-3 Weeks)Lost to Follow-up10

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicSham Then Active 10 Hz tACSActive 10 Hz Then Sham tACSTotal
Age, Continuous42.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.8
43.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.6
43 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.4
BMI25.98 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.1
25.92 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.1
25.94 kg/m^2
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.5
Duration of Pain4.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 3
9.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.4
7.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
11 Participants8 Participants19 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
0 Participants2 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
11 Participants8 Participants19 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
11 Participants10 Participants21 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
3 Participants9 Participants12 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
8 Participants1 Participants9 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 210 / 20
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 210 / 20
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 210 / 20

Outcome results

Primary

Change in Electroencephalogram Power in Alpha Band Before and After 40-minute Stimulation

Changes in the EEG power in the alpha (8-12 Hz) band before and after 40-minute stimulation

Time frame: 5 minute recordings before and after each 40-minute stimulation at each session.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham tACSChange in Electroencephalogram Power in Alpha Band Before and After 40-minute Stimulation0.03 square microvoltsStandard Deviation 0.16
Active10 Hz tACSChange in Electroencephalogram Power in Alpha Band Before and After 40-minute Stimulation0.4 square microvoltsStandard Deviation 0.15
Primary

Change in Heart Rate Variability Before and After 40-minute Stimulation

Changes in parasympathetic tone, increase in high frequency band input via spectral analysis on EKG recordings between active and sham stimulation

Time frame: before and after 40-minute stimulation at each session

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham tACSChange in Heart Rate Variability Before and After 40-minute Stimulation0.206 ms^2Standard Deviation 0.76
Active10 Hz tACSChange in Heart Rate Variability Before and After 40-minute Stimulation-0.01 ms^2Standard Deviation 0.56
Comparison: A 2x2 ANOVA was used to measure change in HF-HRV by condition (10 Hz vs sham) and session (first vs second) as within subjects variablesp-value: 0.319ANOVA
Secondary

Change in Pain Rating on the Visual Analog Scale Before and After 40-minute Stimulation

Self reported pain rating using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ranging from 0-10 done before and after stimulation with '0' being no pain and '10' as bad as it could be. Lower values represent a better outcome. (Pain difference was normalized using modulation index to account for ordinal scale)

Time frame: before and after 40 minute stimulation session

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Sham tACSChange in Pain Rating on the Visual Analog Scale Before and After 40-minute Stimulation-0.178 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.97
Active10 Hz tACSChange in Pain Rating on the Visual Analog Scale Before and After 40-minute Stimulation0.18 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.31
Comparison: Investigators hypothesized that active stimulation would have a greater normalized pain change using a modulation index \[(Pre-Post)/(Pre+Post)\]p-value: 0.0488Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney)

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 5, 2026