Clinical Comparison between HD-tDCS and tDCS for Improving Upper Limb Motor Function: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Sham-Controlled Trial

Table 2

Time-related variables of all three groups (Mean (SD) or median (IQR)).

	HD-tDCS; (25%, 75%)	a-tDCS; (25%, 75%)	Sham; (25%, 75%)	r
ARAT
Tonset	0 (0, 6.5)	0 (0, 18.75)	0 (0, 11)	0.8
Tend	7 (2, 27)	4.5 (0, 45.75)	0 (0, 14.5)	0.259
UEFM
Tonset	16 (11.5, 30.5)	15.5 (7, 25)	8 (6, 25)	0.115
Tend	30 (16.5, 53.5)	27.5 (14.75, 53.75)	16 (6, 23)	0.045
MAS
Tonset	20 (12.5, 26.5)	15 (13, 27.5)	12 (5, 21)	0.179
Tend	29.05 ± 10.1	29 ± 10.44	20.71 ± 15.68	0.047
MBI
Tonset	40.71 ± 20.27	42.5 ± 27.11	33.10 ± 23.64	0.4
Tend	63.1 ± 17.5	55 ± 23.2	49.29 ± 21.35	0.106
Tfollow	78.57 ± 16.06	66.14 ± 21.27	60.95 ± 20.16	0.014

ARAT, action research arm test; UEFM, Fugl–Meyer score for the upper extremity; MAS, motor function assessment scale; MBI, modified Barthel index; SD, standard deviation; HD-tDCS, high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation; and a-tDCS, anodal transcranial direct current stimulation.