Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Efficacy of transcranial direct-current stimulation in women with provoked vestibulodynia.

BACKGROUND: Provoked vestibulodynia is a highly prevalent condition characterized by acute recurrent pain located at the vaginal entrance in response to pressure application or attempted vaginal penetration. Despite a wide variety of treatments offered to women with provoked vestibulodynia, a high proportion of women are refractory to conventional treatment. Transcranial direct-current stimulation is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique that has been shown effective for improving various chronic pain conditions. Growing evidence suggests that the central nervous system could play a key role in provoked vestibulodynia. Targeting the central nervous system could therefore be a promising treatment for women with provoked vestibulodynia.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of active and sham transcranial direct-current stimulation in reducing pain intensity during intercourse in patients with provoked vestibulodynia.

STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a triple-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial. Women aged 17-45 years diagnosed with provoked vestibulodynia by a gynecologist using a validated protocol were randomized to 10 sessions of either active transcranial direct-current stimulation (intensity = 2 mA) or 10 sessions of sham transcranial direct-current stimulation, over a 2-week period. Both active and sham transcranial direct-current stimulation were applied for 20 minutes, with the anode positioned over the primary motor cortex, and the cathode over the contralateral supraorbital area. Outcome measures were collected at baseline, 2 weeks after treatment, and at 3-month follow-up by an evaluator blinded to group assignment. The primary objective was to assess pain intensity during intercourse, using a numerical rating scale. Secondary outcomes focused on sexual function and distress, vestibular sensitivity, psychological distress, treatment satisfaction, and patient impression of change. Statistical analyses were conducted on the intention-to-treat basis, and treatment effects were evaluated using a mixed linear model for repeated measures.

RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were randomly assigned to receive either active (n = 20) or sham (n = 20) transcranial direct-current stimulation treatments from November 2014 through February 2016. Baseline characteristics were similar between the active and sham transcranial direct-current stimulation groups. In full compliance with the study protocol, every participant followed all courses of the study treatment, including assessments at 2-week and 3-month follow-up. Pain during sexual intercourse was not significantly different between active and sham treatment groups 2 weeks after treatment (P = .84) and at follow-up (P = .09). Mean baseline and 2-week assessment pain intensity were, respectively, 6.8 (95% confidence interval, 5.9-7.7) and 5.6 (95% confidence interval, 4.7-6.5) for active transcranial direct-current stimulation (P = .03) vs 7.5 (95% confidence interval, 6.6-8.4) and 5.7 (95% confidence interval, 4.8-6.6) for sham transcranial direct-current stimulation (P = .001). Nonsignificant differences between the 2 groups were also found in their sexual function and distress after treatment (P > .20) and at follow-up (P > .10). Overall, at 2-week assessment 68% assigned to active transcranial direct-current stimulation reported being very much, much, or slightly improved compared to 65% assigned to sham transcranial direct-current stimulation (P = .82), and still comparable at follow-up: 42% vs 65%, respectively (P = .15).

CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that active transcranial direct-current stimulation is not more effective than sham transcranial direct-current stimulation for reducing pain in women with provoked vestibulodynia. Likewise, no significant effects were found on sexual function, vestibular sensitivity, or psychological distress.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app