Knowledge, Attitude, and Motivation Regarding Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Among Rehabilitation Specialists in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Sample Size Calculation
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. Questionnaire Characteristics
2.4. Questionnaire Validation
2.5. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Participant Characteristics
3.2. Assessment of tDCS Knowledge
3.3. Assessment of Attitude and Motivation Toward tDCS
3.4. Scale Reliability
4. Discussion
4.1. Assessment of tDCS Knowledge Among Rehabilitation Specialists
4.2. Assessment of Attitudes Toward tDCS Among Rehabilitation Specialists
4.3. Assessment of Motivation Toward tDCS Among Rehabilitation Specialists
4.4. Study Strength
4.5. Practical Implications
4.6. Study Limitations and Future Research Directions
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Claflin, E.S.; Krishnan, C.; Khot, S.P. Emerging treatments for motor rehabilitation after stroke. Neurohospitalist 2015, 5, 77–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liew, S.-L.; Santarnecchi, E.; Buch, E.R.; Cohen, L.G. Non-invasive brain stimulation in neurorehabilitation: Local and distant effects for motor recovery. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2014, 8, 378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Boggio, P.S.; Nunes, A.; Rigonatti, S.P.; Nitsche, M.A.; Pascual-Leone, A.; Fregni, F. Repeated sessions of noninvasive brain DC stimulation is associated with motor function improvement in stroke patients. Restor. Neurol. Neurosci. 2007, 25, 123–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stagg, C.J.; Nitsche, M.A. Physiological basis of transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuroscientist 2011, 17, 37–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albishi, A.M. How does combining physical therapy with transcranial direct stimulation improve upper-limb motor functions in patients with stroke? A theory perspective. Ann. Med. Surg. 2024, 86, 4601–4607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nitsche, M.A.; Cohen, L.G.; Wassermann, E.M.; Priori, A.; Lang, N.; Antal, A.; Paulus, W.; Hummel, F.; Boggio, P.S.; Fregni, F.; et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation: State of the art 2008. Brain Stimul. 2008, 1, 206–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunoni, A.R.; Amadera, J.; Berbel, B.; Volz, M.S.; Rizzerio, B.G.; Fregni, F. A systematic review on reporting and assessment of adverse effects associated with transcranial direct current stimulation. Int. J. Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011, 14, 1133–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elsner, B.; Kugler, J.; Pohl, M.; Mehrholz, J. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving activities of daily living, and physical and cognitive functioning, in people after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2020, 11, CD009645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Page, S.J.; Cunningham, D.A.; Plow, E.; Blazak, B. It takes two: Noninvasive brain stimulation combined with neurorehabilitation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2015, 96, S89–S93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rocha, S.; Silva, E.; Foerster, Á.; Wiesiolek, C.; Chagas, A.P.; Machado, G.; Baltar, A.; Monte-Silva, K. The impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) on upper limb function in chronic stroke: A double-blind randomized controlled trial. Disabil. Rehabil. 2016, 38, 653–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marquez, J.; van Vliet, P.; McElduff, P.; Lagopoulos, J.; Parsons, M. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): Does it have merit in stroke rehabilitation? A systematic review. Int. J. Stroke 2015, 10, 306–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Orru, G.; Baroni, M.; Cesari, V.; Conversano, C.; Hitchcott, P.K.; Gemignani, A. The effect of single and repeated tDCS sessions on motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review. Arch. Ital. De Biol. 2019, 157, 89–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pilloni, G.; Choi, C.; Shaw, M.T.; Coghe, G.; Krupp, L.; Moffat, M.; Cocco, E.; Pau, M.; Charvet, L. Walking in multiple sclerosis improves with tDCS: A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study. Ann. Clin. Transl. Neurol. 2020, 7, 2310–2319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Inagawa, T.; Yokoi, Y.; Narita, Z.; Maruo, K.; Okazaki, M.; Nakagome, K. Safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation for cognitive rehabilitation in patients with mild or major neurocognitive disorders: A randomized sham-controlled pilot study. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2019, 13, 273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunoni, A.R.; Palm, U. Transcranial direct current stimulation in psychiatry: Mood disorders, schizophrenia and other psychiatric diseases. In Practical Guide to Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: Principles, Procedures and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 431–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, W.-W.; Chiang, W.-C.; Lin, K.-C.; Wu, C.-Y.; Liu, C.-T.; Hsieh, Y.-W.; Lin, Y.-C.; Chen, C.-L. Timing-dependent effects of transcranial direct current stimulation with mirror therapy on daily function and motor control in chronic stroke: A randomized controlled pilot study. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2020, 17, 101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abualait, T.S. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation of primary motor cortex on cortical sensory deficits and hand dexterity in a patient with stroke: A case study. J. Int. Med. Res. 2020, 48, 0300060519894137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bashir, S.; Al-Hussain, F.; Wasay, M.; Yoo, W.-K. The effect of repetitive arm cycling training priming with transcranial direct current stimulation on post-stroke: Pilot study. Brain Neurorehabil. 2018, 11, e10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pollock, A.; Farmer, S.E.; Brady, M.C.; Langhorne, P.; Mead, G.E.; Mehrholz, J.; Van Wijck, F. Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2014, 2014, CD010820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fregni, F.; Pascual-Leone, A. Technology insight: Noninvasive brain sti- mulation in neurology—Perspectives on the therapeutic potential of rTMS and tDCS. Nat. Clin. Pract. Neurol. 2007, 3, 383–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferreira, I.S.; Costa, B.T.; Ramos, C.L.; Lucena, P.; Thibaut, A.; Fregni, F. Searching for the optimal tDCS target for motor rehabilitation. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2019, 16, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cho, H.S.; Cha, H.G. Effect of mirror therapy with tDCS on functional recovery of the upper extremity of stroke patients. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 2015, 27, 1045–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Elsner, B.; Kwakkel, G.; Kugler, J.; Mehrholz, J. Transcranial direct current stimu- lation (tDCS) for improving capacity in activities and arm function after stroke: A network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2017, 14, 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- O’Brien, A.T.; Bertolucci, F.; Torrealba-Acosta, G.; Huerta, R.; Fregni, F.; Thibaut, A. Non-invasive brain stimulation for fine motor improvement after stroke: A meta-analysis. Eur. J. Neurol. 2018, 25, 1017–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, S.H. Effects of dual transcranial direct current stimulation and modified constraint-induced movement therapy to improve upper-limb function after stroke: A double-blinded, pilot randomized controlled trial. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. 2021, 30, 105928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, N.; Summers, J.J.; Cauraugh, J.H. Transcranial direct current stimu- lation facilitates motor learning post-stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2016, 87, 345–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Triccas, L.T.; Burridge, J.; Hughes, A.; Pickering, R.; Desikan, M.; Rothwell, J.; Verheyden, G. Multiple sessions of tran- scranial direct current stimulation and upper extremity rehabilitation in stroke: A review and meta-analysis. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2016, 127, 946–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lefebvre, S.; Laloux, P.; Peeters, A.; Desfontaines, P.; Jamart, J.; Vandermeeren, Y. Dual-tDCS enhances online motor skill learning and long-term retention in chronic stroke patients. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2013, 6, 343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolognini, N.; Pascual-Leone, A.; Fregni, F. Using non-invasive brain stimulation to augment motor training-induced plasticity. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2009, 6, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lefaucheur, J.P.; Wendling, F. Mechanisms of action of tDCS: A brief and practical overview. Neurophysiol. Clin. 2019, 49, 269–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Hussain, F.; Nasim, E.; Iqbal, M.; Altwaijri, N.; Asim, N.; Yoo, W.K.; Bashir, S. The effect of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with functional task training on motor recovery in stroke patients. Medicine 2021, 100, e24718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bashir, S.; Aisha, D.; Hamza, A.; Al-Hussain, F.; Yoo, W.K. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on cortex modulation by stimulation of the primary motor cortex and parietal cortex in humans. Int. J. Neurosci. 2021, 131, 1107–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Albishi, A.M.; Alhadlaq, S.A.; Altowairqi, R.T.; Alharbi, M.F.; Alsubiheen, A.M.; Alosaimi, M.H.; Bashir, S.; Alokaily, A.O. Knowledge and attitude toward transcranial magnetic stimulation among rehabilitation specialists in Saudi Arabia. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2024, 12, 1352170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alshehri, M.M.; Esht, V.; Alajam, R.A.; Alfifi, A.H.; Qahtani, M.K.; Alhwoaimel, N.; Alenazi, A.M.; Alqahtani, B.A.; Alhowimel, A. Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices Among Clinical Physiotherapists Regarding Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Application in Stroke Rehabilitation: Questionnaire Development and Validation via Multicenter Observations in Saudi Arabia. J. Disabil. Res. 2024, 3, 20240071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AlHadi, A.N.; AlShiban, A.M.; Alomar, M.A.; Aljadoa, O.F.; AlSayegh, A.M.; Jameel, M.A. Knowledge of and attitude toward repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation among psychiatrists in Saudi Arabia. J. ECT 2017, 33, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pourhoseingholi, M.A.; Vahedi, M.; Rahimzadeh, M. Sample size calculation in medical studies. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. Bed Bench 2013, 6, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wasfi, R.M.; Alenezi, F.S.; Alzubaidi, L.M.; Hassanein, M. The supply and demand for rehabilitation health workforce in Saudi Arabia. East. Mediterr. Health J. 2024, 30, 344–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yusoff, M.S. ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Educ. Med. J. 2019, 11, 49–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Terwee, C.B.; Bot, S.D.; de Boer, M.R.; Van der Windt, D.A.; Knol, D.L.; Dekker, J.; Bouter, L.M.; de Vet, H.C. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2007, 60, 34–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albishi, A.M. Knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of physical therapists towards conventional physical therapy-across-sectional study. Ann. Med. Surg. 2024, 86, 1942–1949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussein, H.M.; Alshammari, S.F.; Alanazi, I.A.; Alenzy, G.M.; Alrashidy, R.H. Sex-related differences in physical therapy career expectations in ha’il, Saudi Arabia. Acta Neuropsychol. 2022, 20, 385–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alghadir, A.; Zafar, H.; Iqbal, Z.A.; Anwer, S. Physical therapy education in Saudi Arabia. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 2015, 27, 1621–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bindawas, S.M. Physical therapy entry-level education and post-professional training in Saudi Arabia: A comparison of perceptions of physical therapists from five regions. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 2014, 26, 1377–1382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Health, M.O. Health Statistics Annual Book. 2013. Available online: https://www.moh.gov.sa/en/Ministry/Statistics/book/Documents/Statistics-Book-1434.pdf (accessed on 9 April 2020).
- Alrwaily, M.; Alanazi, F. Prevalence and Determinants of Knowledge of Musculoskeletal Disorders Among Healthcare Providers and Students in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. J. Multidiscip. Healthc. 2022, ume 15, 1789–1797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Eisa, E.S.; Al-Hoqail, H.; Al-Rushud, A.S.; Al-Harthi, A.; Al-Mass, B.; Al-Harbi, B.M.; Al-Azzaz, S.; Alghadir, A.H.; Iqbal, Z.A. Awareness, perceptions and beliefs about physiotherapy held by physicians working in Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study. J. Phys. Ther. Sci. 2016, 28, 3435–3439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albishi, A.M.; Al-Ageel, H.M.; AlAbdulwahab, S.S. Knowledge and Attitude Towards Bell’s Palsy Rehabilitation Among Physical Therapists in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy 2024, ume 17, 2401–2413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Graham, I.D.; Logan, J.; Harrison, M.B.; Straus, S.E.; Tetroe, J.; Caswell, W.; Robinson, N. Lost in knowledge translation: Time for a map? J. Contin. Educ. Health Prof. 2006, 26, 13–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moncion, K.; Biasin, L.; Jagroop, D.; Bayley, M.; Danells, C.; Mansfield, A.; Salbach, N.M.; Inness, E.; Tang, A. Barriers and facilitators to aerobic exercise implementation in stroke rehabilitation: A scoping review. J. Neurol. Phys. Ther. 2020, 44, 179–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vallejo, P.; Cueva, E.; Martínez-Lozada, P.; García-Ríos, C.A.; Miranda-Barros, D.H.; Leon-Rojas, J.E.; Cueva, E.J. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in stroke: A literature review of the current role and controversies of neurorehabilitation through electromagnetic pulses. Cureus 2023, 15, e41714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, J.; Gong, Y.; Lin, X.; Bao, Y.; Sun, H.; Lu, L. Knowledge and attitudes about transcranial magnetic stimulation among psychiatrists in China. BMC Psychiatry 2020, 20, 416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bikson, M.; Grossman, P.; Thomas, C.; Zannou, A.L.; Jiang, J.; Adnan, T.; Mourdoukoutas, A.P.; Kronberg, G.; Truong, D.; Boggio, P.; et al. Safety of transcranial direct current stimulation: Evidence based update 2016. Brain Stimul. 2016, 9, 641–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fregni, F.; Nitsche, M.A.; Loo, C.K.; Brunoni, A.R.; Marangolo, P.; Leite, J.; Carvalho, S.; Bolognini, N.; Caumo, W.; Paik, N.J.; et al. Regulatory considerations for the clinical and research use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): Review and recommendations from an expert panel. Clin. Res. Regul. Aff. 2015, 32, 22–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cogan, A.M.; Weaver, J.A.; McHarg, M.; Leland, N.E.; Davidson, L.; Mallinson, T. Association of length of stay, recovery rate, and therapy time per day with functional outcomes after hip fracture surgery. JAMA Netw. Open 2020, 3, e1919672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kumru, H.; Murillo, N.; Benito-Penalva, J.; Tormos, J.M.; Vidal, J. Transcranial direct current stimulation is not effective in the motor strength and gait recovery following motor incomplete spinal cord injury during Lokomat(®) gait training. Neurosci. Lett. 2016, 620, 143–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Item | N (%) | |
---|---|---|
Age | Mean ± SD: 31.4 ± 6.1 SD | |
Gender | Female | 72 (64.3) |
Male | 40 (35.7) | |
Education | Doctoral | 16 (14.3) |
Master’s | 27 (24.1) | |
Bachelor’s | 69 (61.6) | |
Rehabilitation subspecialty | Physical therapy | 40 (35.7) |
Neurorehabilitation | 17 (15.2) | |
Pediatrics | 11 (9.8) | |
Orthopedic | 18 (16.1) | |
Occupational therapy | 4 (3.6) | |
Speech and swallowing therapy | 17 (15.2) | |
Cardiopulmonary therapy | 5 (4.5) | |
Number of conferences attended annually | 1 | 54 (48.2) |
2–3 | 44 (39.3) | |
More than 3 | 14 (12.5) | |
Region | Central | 50 (44.6) |
Western | 24 (21.4) | |
Eastern | 10 (8.9) | |
Northern | 13 (11.6) | |
Southern | 15 (13.4) | |
Primary practice institution | General Hospital | 50 (44.6) |
Teaching Hospital | 24 (21.4) | |
Private Practice | 15 (13.4) | |
Rehabilitation Center | 10 (8.9) | |
University | 13 (11.6) | |
Years of experience | 0–2 | 23 (20.5) |
3–5 | 24 (21.4) | |
6–10 | 42 (37.5) | |
>10 | 23 (20.5) | |
The main source of knowledge | Articles | 51 (45.5) |
Conferences | 12 (10.7) | |
Textbooks | 17 (15.2) | |
Discussions with colleagues | 25 (22.3) | |
Personal experience with tDCS | 7 (6.3) | |
Have you trained abroad for more than six months? | Yes | 30 (26.8) |
No | 82 (73.2) | |
Do you have a tDCS system at your workplace? | Yes | 14 (12.5) |
No | 98 (87.5) | |
What type of neurological cases do you most frequently encounter in your caseload | Stroke | 83 (74.1) |
Traumatic brain injuries | 4 (3.6) | |
Movements disorders | 8 (7.1) | |
Brain tumors | 1 (0.9) | |
I do not see patients with neurological disorders | 16 (14.3) | |
Do you have previous experience with a tDCS system? | Yes | 19 (18.6) |
No | 83 (81.4) | |
How would you assess your level of knowledge regarding tDCS? | Low | 77 (68.8) |
Medium | 31 (27.7) | |
High | 4 (3.6) |
Questions | Frequency (Percentage) of Responders | Mean ± SD | |
---|---|---|---|
Correct | Incorrect | ||
1. tDCS can be a diagnostic tool. (F) | 12 (%10.7) | 100 (%89.3) | 0.1 ± 0.3 |
2. tDCS can be a treatment tool. (T) | 65 (%58.0) | 47 (%42.0) | 0.6 ± 0.5 |
3. The recommended number of tDCS sessions varies according to the subject condition. (T) | 46 (%41.1) | 66 (%58.9) | 0.4 ± 0.5 |
4. tDCS has different modes. (T) | 51 (%45.5) | 61 (%54.5) | 0.5 ± 0.5 |
5. Anodal tDCS increases the excitability of the stimulated area. (T) | 35 (%31.3) | 77 (%68.8) | 0.3 ± 0.5 |
6. Cathodal tDCS decreases the excitability of the stimulated area. (T) | 20 (%17.9) | 92 (%82.1) | 0.2 ± 0.4 |
7. tDCS cannot be used in cases of epilepsy/seizures, febrile convulsions in infancy, and recurrent fainting spells. (T) | 35 (%31.3) | 77 (%68.8) | 0.3 ± 0.5 |
8. tDCS can cause minor side effects such as a tingling and itching sensation. (T) | 37 (%33.0) | 75 (%67.0) | 0.3 ± 0.5 |
9. tDCS can cause severe brain damage. (F) | 32 (%28.6) | 80 (%71.4) | 0.3 ± 0.5 |
Total Knowledge Score | 3.0 ± 2.7 |
Questions | Frequency (Percentage) of Responders | Mean ± SD | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Strongly Agree | Agree | Neutral | Disagree | Strongly Disagree | ||
1. I believe that tDCS technology is risky. | 2 (1.8) | 12 (10.7) | 60 (53.6) | 32 (28.6) | 6 (5.4) | 3.3 ± 0.8 |
2. There is no sufficient evidence of the efficacy of tDCS in neurorehabilitation. | 5 (4.5) | 22 (19.6) | 66 (58.9) | 16 (14.3) | 3 (2.7) | 2.9 ± 0.8 |
3. tDCS should be combined with other conventional treatments to augment the patient’s recovery. | 15 (13.4) | 44 (39.3) | 49 (43.8) | 2 (1.8) | 2 (1.8) | 3.6 ± 0.8 |
4. I would like to participate in tDCS training within my institute. | 18 (16.1) | 45 (40.2) | 35 (31.3) | 10 (8.9) | 4 (3.6) | 3.6 ± 1.0 |
5. I recommend that my patients participate in tDCS clinical trials. | 9 (8.0) | 21 (18.8) | 72 (64.3) | 8 (7.1) | 2 (1.8) | 3.2 ± 0.8 |
Total Attitude Score | 16.6 ± 2.7 |
Item | N (%) | |
---|---|---|
Do you have any concerns regarding the integration of tDCS into your practice? | Safety | 24 (21.4) |
Cost | 8 (7.1) | |
Administrative approval | 6 (5.4) | |
tDCS training | 26 (23.3) | |
Patient consent | 10 (8.9) | |
I have no concerns | 32 (28.6) | |
Other | 6 (5.4) | |
What are your concerns about the currently available therapy programs for the most common neurological conditions in your caseload? | Length of the treatment program | 29 (25.9) |
Effectiveness of the treatment program | 56 (50.0) | |
Feasibility of the treatment program | 25 (22.3) | |
What percentage of improvement would you need to see in your patients to implement tDCS as part of their therapy program? | Less than 20% | 20 (17.9) |
20–30% | 32 (28.6) | |
31–50% | 33 (29.5) | |
More than 50% | 27 (24.1) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Albishi, A.M.; Alokaily, A.O.; Altaib, M.K.; Alharbi, M.F.; Aldohbeyb, A.A. Knowledge, Attitude, and Motivation Regarding Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Among Rehabilitation Specialists in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Healthcare 2025, 13, 1300. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13111300
Albishi AM, Alokaily AO, Altaib MK, Alharbi MF, Aldohbeyb AA. Knowledge, Attitude, and Motivation Regarding Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Among Rehabilitation Specialists in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Healthcare. 2025; 13(11):1300. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13111300
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlbishi, Alaa M., Ahmed O. Alokaily, Madhawi K. Altaib, Mohammed F. Alharbi, and Ahmed A. Aldohbeyb. 2025. "Knowledge, Attitude, and Motivation Regarding Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Among Rehabilitation Specialists in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study" Healthcare 13, no. 11: 1300. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13111300
APA StyleAlbishi, A. M., Alokaily, A. O., Altaib, M. K., Alharbi, M. F., & Aldohbeyb, A. A. (2025). Knowledge, Attitude, and Motivation Regarding Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Among Rehabilitation Specialists in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Healthcare, 13(11), 1300. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13111300