Low-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Stroke-Induced Upper Limb Motor Deficit: A Meta-Analysis

Table 1

Characteristics of the selected studies.

Study	N (Exp/Ctr)	Mean age	Time poststroke	Lesion site	Trial design	rTMS protocol	Outcome measurement		Follow-up	Combined training/practice
							Motor function	Neurophysiology
Takeuchi et al. [19]	10/10	59 Y	6–60 m	Subcortical	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1500 pulses × 1 days	Pinch force	rMT, MEP		Motor training
Fregni et al. [26]	10/5	56 Y	6–120 m	(13/15) Subcortical	P	1.0 Hz, 100% rMT, 1500 pulses × 5 days	PPT, JTT	rMT
Liepert et al. [24]	12/12	63 Y	<2 wks	Subcortical	C	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1200 pulses × 1 days	NHPT, grip force
Takeuchi et al. [18]	10/10	62.3 Y	7–121 m	Subcortical	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1500 pulses × 1 days	Pinch force	rMT, MEP		Motor training
Dafotakis et al. [20]	12/12	45.5 Y	1–4 m	Subcortical	C	1.0 Hz, 100% rMT, 600 pulses × 1 days	Pinch force
Nowak et al. [27]	15/15	46 Y	1–4 m	Subcortical	C	1.0 Hz, 100% rMT, 600 pulses × 1 days	Finger tapping,
Khedr et al. [10]	12/12	57.9 Y	1-2 wks	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 100% rMT, 900 pulses × 5 days	Finger tapping, grip force	MEP	3 m	Passive movement
Emara et al. [8]	20/20	54 Y	2–13.5 m	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 110%–120% rMT, 1500 pulses × 10 days	Finger tapping		3 m	Physical therapy
Theilig et al. [15]	12/12	61 Y	2 wks–58 m	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 100% rMT, 900 pulses × 10 days	WMFT	MEP		Extensor activity
Takeuchi et al. [17]	9/9	61.5 Y	62–71.9 m	Subcortical	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1200 pulses × 1 days	Pinch force	MEP		Motor training
Conforto et al. [21]	15/15	55.8 Y	5–45 days	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1500 pulses × 10 days	Pinch force, JTT		1 m	Rehabilitation treatment
Seniow et al. [30]	20/20	63.4 Y	12–129 days	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1800 pulses × 15 days	FMA		3 m	Motor training
Sasaki et al. [9]	11/9	65 Y	6–29 days	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1800 pulses × 5 days	Finger tapping, grip force			Motor training
Higgins et al. [22]	6/5	66.2 Y	18–315 m	Not reported	P	1.0 Hz, 110% rMT, 1.200 pulses × 8 days	Pinch force		1 m	Task-oriented training
Sung et al. [28]	15/12	63.2 Y	3–12 m	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 600 pulses × 10 days	Finger tapping, WMFT	rMT, MEP		Occupational therapy
Wang et al. [32]	17/15	62.6 Y	2–6 m	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 600 pulses × 10 days	WMFT	rMT, MEP		Task-oriented training
Rose et al. [23]	11/10	64.6 Y	7–150 m	Not reported	P	1.0 Hz, 100% rMT, 1200 pulses × 16 days	Grip force, FMA	rMT, MEP	1 m	Functional task practice
Galvão et al. [31]	10/10	61 Y	>6 m	Not reported	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1500 pulses × 10 days	FMA		1 m	Physical therapy
Ludemann-Podubecka et al. [29]	20/20	67 Y	0.25–4 m	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 100% rMT, 900 pulses × 15 days	Finger tapping, WMFT	MEP	6 m	Task-oriented training
Zheng et al. [33]	55/53	66 Y	<1 m	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 90% rMT, 1800 pulses × 24 days	FMA, WMFT			Occupational therapy
Matsuura et al. [25]	10/10	73. Y	<1 m	Subcortical	P	1.0 Hz, 100% rMT, 1200 pulses × 5 days	Grip force, FMA
Du et al. [34]	23/23		3 days–1 m	Nonspecified	P	1.0 Hz, 110–120% rMT, 1200 pulses × 20 days	FMA		6 m	Motor exercises

Ctr: control group; Exp: experimental group; P: parallel sham control; C: crossover sham control; FMA: Fugl-Meyer assessment; ARAT: action research arm test; JTT: Jebsen-Taylor test; m: month; MEP: motor-evoked potential; NHPT: nine-hole peg test; PPT: purdue pegboard test; rMT: resting motor threshold; wk: week; Y: years; WMFT: Wolf motor function test.