Revista CEFAC
https://revistacefac.org.br/article/doi/10.1590/1982-0216/20252758625
Revista CEFAC
Artigos Originais

Transcranial direct current stimulation combined with augmentative and alternative communication for children with cerebral palsy: Preliminary results

Estimulação transcraniana por corrente contínua e comunicação aumentativa e alternativa para crianças com paralisia cerebral: resultados preliminares

Amanda Macedo de Freitas Souza Ramos; Veronica Unzueta; Marcela de Oliveira Araujo; Paula Soares da Silva; Claudia Santos Oliveira; Luanda André Collange-Grecco

Downloads: 1
Views: 929

Abstract

Purpose: to investigate the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex combined with speech-language interventions, using augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) at improving the communication level of children with cerebral palsy (CP) on levels III to V of the Communication Function Classification System (CFCS).

Methods: six children with CP, 6 to 12 years of age participated in a preliminary study. Ten sessions of tDCS (1 mA, 20 minutes) were performed in combination with essential word training via the TD Snap® software. Communication levels were assessed before and after the intervention, using the Communication Matrix. Safety was monitored through reports of adverse effects.

Results: all participants completed the protocol with good tolerability and no serious side effects. A trend was found toward an improvement in communication levels, with all cases advancing one level on the Communication Matrix. Most participants reported a tolerable tingling sensation and localized redness was transitory.

Conclusion: the combination of tDCS and AAC proved feasible, safe, and potentially effective at improving communication in children with moderate to severe CP. However, due to the limitations of this study, future studies with larger samples and controlled designs are needed to confirm these findings and optimize intervention protocols.

Keywords

Cerebral Palsy; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation; Nonverbal Communication; Child

Resumo

Objetivo: investigar os efeitos da estimulação transcraniana por corrente contínua (tDCS) anódica sobre o córtex pré-frontal dorsolateral esquerdo, combinada a intervenções fonoaudiológicas com Comunicação Aumentativa e Alternativa (CAA), no nível de comunicação de crianças com paralisia cerebral (PC) classificadas entre os níveis III e V do Sistema de Classificação da Função de Comunicação (CFCS).

Métodos: seis crianças (6-12 anos) realizaram dez sessões de tDCS (1 mA; 20 min) associadas ao treino de vocabulário essencial via TD Snap®. O nível de comunicação foi avaliado antes e após a intervenção pela Matriz de Comunicação. A segurança foi monitorada por relatos de eventos adversos.

Resultados: todos os participantes concluíram o protocolo, com boa tolerabilidade e ausência de eventos adversos graves. Observou-se tendência de melhora no nível de comunicação, com progressão de pelo menos um nível na Matriz de Comunicação em todos os casos. Sensação de formigamento foi tolerável e a vermelhidão local apresentou-se transitória.

Conclusão: a combinação tDCS + CAA mostrou-se viável, segura e potencialmente eficaz para aprimorar a comunicação em crianças com PC moderada à grave. São necessários estudos controlados, com amostras maiores e seguimento prolongado, para confirmar a efetividade e otimizar os parâmetros de intervenção.

Palavras-chave

Paralisia Cerebral; Estimulação Transcraniana por Corrente Contínua; Comunicação Não Verbal; Criança

Referências

1. Novak I, Morgan C, Fahey M, Finch-Edmondson M, Galea C, Hines A et al. State of the evidence traffic lights 2019: Systematic review of interventions for preventing and treating children with cerebral palsy. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2020;20(2):3. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11910-020-1022-Z PMID:32086598.

2. Jackman M, Sakzewski L, Morgan C, Boyd RN, Brennan S, Langdon K et al. Interventions to improve physical function for children and young people with cerebral palsy: International clinical practice guideline. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2022;64(5):536-549. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.15055 PMID:34549424.

3. Morgan C, Novak I, Dale RC, Guzzetta A, Badawi N. Single-blind randomised controlled trial of GAME (Goals-Activity-Motor Enrichment) in infants at high risk of cerebral palsy. Res Dev Disabil. 2016;55:256-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2016.04.005 PMID:27164480.

4. Pennington L, Dave M, Rudd J, Hidecker MJC, Caynes K, Pearce MS. Communication disorders in young children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2020;62(10):1161-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.14635 PMID:32729634.

5. Morgan C, Fetters L, Adde L, Badawi N, Bancali A, Boyd RB et al. Early intervention for children aged 0 to 2 years with or at high risk of cerebral palsy: International clinical practice guideline based on systematic reviews. JAMA Pediatr. 2021;175(8):846-58. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2021.087 PMID:33999106.

6. Hidecker MJC, Paneth N, Rosenbaum PL, Kent RD, Lillie J, Eulenberg JB et al. Developing and validating the Communication Function Classification System for individuals with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011;53(8):704-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2011.03996.x PMID:21707596.

7. Cockerill H. Developing the Communication Function Classification System for individuals with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011;53(8):675. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2011.04035.x PMID: 21707607.

8. McCoy SW, Palisano R, Avery L, Tylkowski C, Gorton G, Novak I et al. Physical, occupational, and speech therapy for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2020;62(12):140-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.14325 PMID: 31353456.

9. Butt AK, Zubair R, Rathore FA. The role of augmentative and alternative communication in speech and language therapy: A mini review. J Pak Med Assoc. 2022;72(3):581-5. https://doi.org/10.47391/JPMA.22-023 PMID: 35320253.

10. Avagyan A, Mkrtchyan H, Shafa FA, Mathew JA, Petrosyan T. Effectiveness and determinant variables of augmentative and alternative communication interventions in cerebral palsy patients with communication deficit: A systematic review. CoDAS. 2021;33(5):e20200244. https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20202020244 PMID:34378726.

11. Hidecker MJC. Speech and augmentative and alternative communication needs in young children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2022;64(9):1053. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.15232 PMID: 35426117.

12. Tang L, Wu Y, Ma J, Lu Y, Wang L, Shan C. Application of tDCS in children with cerebral palsy: A mini-review. Front Pediatr. 2022;10:966650. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.966650 PMID:36204667.

13. Duarte NdeAC, Collange Grecco LA, Zanon N, Galli M, Fregni F, Santos Oliveira C. Motor cortex plasticity in children with spastic cerebral palsy: A systematic review. J Mot Behav. 2017;49(6):641-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2016.1219310 PMID:27703212.

14. Lima VLCC, Cosmo C, Lima KB, Maia MFM, Teixeira LC, Andrade SM et al. Neuromodulation: A combined-therapy protocol for speech rehabilitation in a child with cerebral palsy. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2022;29:10-5. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2016.1219310 PMID:27754798.

15. Lima VLC, Collange Grecco LA, Marques VC, Fregni F, Brandão de Ávila CR. Transcranial direct current stimulation combined with integrative speech therapy in a child with cerebral palsy: A case report. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2016;20(2):252-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2015.03.007 PMID:27210840.

16. Ko EJ, Hong MJ, Choi EJ, Yuk JS, Yum MS, Sung IY. Effect of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation combined with cognitive training for improving cognition and language among children with cerebral palsy and cognitive impairment: A pilot randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Front Pediatr. 2021;9:713792. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2021.713792 PMID:34513765.

17. Rowland C. Using the Communication Matrix to assess expressive skills in early communicators. Commun Disord Q. 2011;32(3):190-201. https://doi.org/10.1177/152574011039465

18. Quinn ED, Rowland C. Exploring expressive communication skills in a cross-sectional sample of children and young adults with Angelman syndrome. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2017;26(2):369-82. https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_AJSLP-15-0075 PMID: 28384804.

19. Rowland C, Fried-Oken M. Communication Matrix: A clinical and research assessment tool targeting children with severe communication disorders. J Pediatr Rehabil Med. 2010;3(4):319-29. https://doi.org/10.3233/PRM-2010-0144 PMID: 21791866.

20. Quinn ED, Cook A, Rowland C. An online community of practice to improve intervention for individuals with complex communication needs. Augment Altern Commun. 2019;35(4):311-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2019.1566400 PMID: 30900476.

21. Quinn ED, Cook A, Wiedrick J, Rowland C. An initial investigation into the feasibility of the Communication Matrix Professional Development Program for educational professionals working with students with complex communication needs. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2021;52(4):1080-94. https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_LSHSS-20-00154 PMID: 34623905.

22. Homan RW, Herman J, Purdy P. Cerebral location of international 10-20 system electrode placement. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1987;66(4):376-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(87)90206-9 PMID: 2435517.

23. Laubscher E, Light J. Core vocabulary lists for young children and considerations for early language development: A narrative review. Augment Altern Commun. 2020;36(1):43-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2020.1737964 PMID: 32172598.

24. Buchanan D, Bogdanowicz T, Khanna N, Lockman-Dufour G, Robaey P, D'Angiulli A. Systematic review on the safety and tolerability of transcranial direct current stimulation in children and adolescents. Brain Sci. 2021;11(2):212. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11020212 PMID: 33578648.

25. Zhong M, Zhang Y, Luo J, Li H, Zhou J, Wang Y et al. Safety and effectiveness of non-invasive brain stimulation on mobility and balance function in children with cerebral palsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2025;22(1):111. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-025-01619-7 PMID: 40383797. PMCID: PMC12087172.

26. Metelski N, Gu Y, Quinn L, Friel KM, Gordon AM. Safety and efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation for the upper extremities in children with cerebral palsy: A systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2024;66(5):573-97. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.15720 PMID: 37528530.

27. Borgestig M, Sandqvist J, Parsons R, Falkmer T, Hemmingsson H. Eye gaze performance for children with severe physical impairments using gaze-based assistive technology: A longitudinal study. Assist Technol. 2016;28(2):93-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2015.1072011 PMID: 26496529.

28. Stevens-Hofer B, Wallen M, McInerney M, Karlsson P. Eyes on communication: Strategies to facilitate uptake of clinical practice guidelines for implementation of eye-gaze control technology by people with cerebral palsy. A mixed-methods study. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2025;20(8):1128-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2024.2437142 PMID: 39645662.

29. Puttemans F, Copermans E, Karlsson P, Vanreusel B, De Vaan G, Van de Winckel A et al. An intensive eye-tracking intervention in children with dyskinetic cerebral palsy: A multiple case study. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2025;20(7):867-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2024.2412073 PMID: 39395189.
 


Submetido em:
21/08/2025

Aceito em:
30/08/2025

691e1c09a953952e6b5016a7 cefac Articles

Revista CEFAC

Share this page
Page Sections