Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Feb 1:15:625321.
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.625321. eCollection 2021.

A Critical Review of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation for Neuromodulation in Clinical and Non-clinical Samples

Affiliations
Review

A Critical Review of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation for Neuromodulation in Clinical and Non-clinical Samples

Tad T Brunyé et al. Front Hum Neurosci. .

Abstract

Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) is a neuromodulation tool used for treating several clinical disorders, including insomnia, anxiety, and depression. More recently, a limited number of studies have examined CES for altering affect, physiology, and behavior in healthy, non-clinical samples. The physiological, neurochemical, and metabolic mechanisms underlying CES effects are currently unknown. Computational modeling suggests that electrical current administered with CES at the earlobes can reach cortical and subcortical regions at very low intensities associated with subthreshold neuromodulatory effects, and studies using electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) show some effects on alpha band EEG activity, and modulation of the default mode network during CES administration. One theory suggests that CES modulates brain stem (e.g., medulla), limbic (e.g., thalamus, amygdala), and cortical (e.g., prefrontal cortex) regions and increases relative parasympathetic to sympathetic drive in the autonomic nervous system. There is no direct evidence supporting this theory, but one of its assumptions is that CES may induce its effects by stimulating afferent projections of the vagus nerve, which provides parasympathetic signals to the cardiorespiratory and digestive systems. In our critical review of studies using CES in clinical and non-clinical populations, we found severe methodological concerns, including potential conflicts of interest, risk of methodological and analytic biases, issues with sham credibility, lack of blinding, and a severe heterogeneity of CES parameters selected and employed across scientists, laboratories, institutions, and studies. These limitations make it difficult to derive consistent or compelling insights from the extant literature, tempering enthusiasm for CES and its potential to alter nervous system activity or behavior in meaningful or reliable ways. The lack of compelling evidence also motivates well-designed and relatively high-powered experiments to assess how CES might modulate the physiological, affective, and cognitive responses to stress. Establishing reliable empirical links between CES administration and human performance is critical for supporting its prospective use during occupational training, operations, or recovery, ensuring reliability and robustness of effects, characterizing if, when, and in whom such effects might arise, and ensuring that any benefits of CES outweigh the risks of adverse events.

Keywords: electrotherapy; human performance; neuromodulation; non-invasive brain stimulation; psychiatry.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Past and present mechanistic explanations for CES effects on brain and behavior, including at the levels of the central and peripheral nervous system, neurotransmitters and hormones, and behavioral and mood effects.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Agar N. (2013). Truly Human Enhancement: A Philosophical Defense of Limits. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262026635.001.0001 - DOI
    1. Amr M., El-Wasify M., Elmaadawi A. Z., Roberts R. J., El-Mallakh R. S. (2013). Cranial electrotherapy stimulation for the treatment of chronically symptomatic bipolar patients. J. ECT 29, e31–32. 10.1097/YCT.0b013e31828a344d - DOI - PubMed
    1. Arnsten A. F. T. (1998). Catecholamine modulation of prefrontal cortical cognitive function. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2, 436–447. 10.1016/S1364-6613(98)01240-6 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Asamoah B., Khatoun A., Mc Laughlin M. (2019). TACS motor system effects can be caused by transcutaneous stimulation of peripheral nerves. Nat. Commun. 10:266. 10.1038/s41467-018-08183-w - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aseem A., Hussain M. E. (2019). Impact of cranial electrostimulation on sleep: a systematic review. Sleep Vigilance 3, 101–112. 10.1007/s41782-019-00075-3 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources