Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive neuromodulation technique used to improve post-stroke motor deficits. However, previous trials and meta-analyses have reported inconsistent findings, and its dose–response effects on upper-limb recovery remain unclear.
Objective:
To systematically evaluate the dose–response effects and safety of tDCS on post-stroke upper-limb recovery and assess potential effect modifiers.
Methods:
PubMed, EMBASE, and seven other databases, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, were searched from inception to August 12, 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating motor cortex–targeted tDCS (⩾5 sessions) with sham control were included if extractable FMA-UE data were available, regardless of whether FMA-UE was a primary or secondary outcome. Random-effects meta-analysis, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses explored dose–response patterns and effect modifiers.
Results:
Forty-two RCTs involving 1523 patients were analyzed. tDCS significantly improved upper-limb function, with a small overall effect (SMD, 0.28; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.12–0.43). Greater benefits were observed in severe impairment and chronic-phase stroke, and bihemispheric stimulation showed favorable pooled effects. Electrode size significantly influenced efficacy, and derived dose metrics, particularly current density and total charge density, appeared useful for characterizing dose–response patterns beyond conventional single-dose parameters. Common adverse events (AEs), including tingling, erythema, and headache, were mild and transient, and no excess risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) was detected.
Conclusion:
tDCS significantly improved post-stroke upper-limb recovery and showed no evidence of increased SAEs, although mild local AEs were more frequent. Treatment effects were not adequately explained by conventional single-dose parameters alone and appeared to be better characterized by electrode size and derived dose metrics, particularly current density and total charge density. These findings support multidimensional dose optimization and patient-stratified tDCS protocols in future trials.
GBD 2023 Causes of Death Collaborators. Global burden of 292 causes of death in 204 countries and territories and 660 subnational locations, 1990–2023: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023. Lancet2025; 406: 1811–1872.
2.
MauroMCFasanoAGermanottaM, et al. Restoring of interhemispheric symmetry in patients with stroke following bilateral or unilateral robot-assisted upper-limb rehabilitation: a pilot randomized controlled trial. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng2024; 32: 3590–3602.
3.
AlemannoFFedeliDMontiA, et al. Increased interhemispheric functional connectivity after right anodal tDCS in chronic non-fluent aphasia: preliminary findings. Front Neurosci2024; 18: 1346095.
4.
GongQYanRChenH, et al. Effects of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation on rehabilitation of upper limb motor function after stroke. Front Neurol2023; 14: 1044333.
5.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ2021; 372: n71.
6.
MaherCGSherringtonCHerbertRDMoseleyAMElkinsM.Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys Ther2003; 83: 713–721.
7.
HigginsJPTThomasJChandlerJ, et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (version 6.3). London: Cochrane, 2022.
8.
SchandelmaierSBrielMVaradhanR, et al. Development of the Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN) in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses. CMAJ2020; 192: E901–E906.
9.
AlisarDCOzenSSozayS.Effects of bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation on upper extremity function in stroke patients: a randomized double-blind sham-controlled study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis2020; 29: 104454.
10.
AngKKGuanCPhuaKS, et al. Facilitating effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor imagery brain-computer interface with robotic feedback for stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2015; 96: S79–87.
11.
BeaulieuLDBlanchetteAKMercierCBernard-LarocqueVMilotMH.Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of bilateral transcranial direct current stimulation combined to a resistance training program in chronic stroke survivors: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study. Restor Neurol Neurosci2019; 37: 333–346.
12.
BoasquevisqueDDServinsckinsLDe PaivaJPQ, et al. Contralesional cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation does not enhance upper limb function in subacute stroke: a pilot randomized clinical trial. Neural Plast2021; 2021: 8858394.
13.
ChengXXZhangLLLiuW, et al. Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on upper limb motor function in chronic-phase stroke patients with hemiplegia. Chin Med Equip J2024; 45: 67–73.
14.
CunninghamDAVarnerinNMachadoA, et al. Stimulation targeting higher motor areas in stroke rehabilitation: a proof-of-concept, randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled study of effectiveness and underlying mechanisms. Restor Neurol Neurosci2015; 33: 911–926.
15.
EdwardsDJCortesMRykman-PeltzA, et al. Clinical improvement with intensive robot-assisted arm training in chronic stroke is unchanged by supplementary tDCS. Restor Neurol Neurosci2019; 37: 167–180.
16.
FuscoAAssenzaFIosaM, et al. The ineffective role of cathodal tDCS in enhancing the functional motor outcomes in early phase of stroke rehabilitation: an experimental trial. Biomed Res Int2014; 2014: 547290.
17.
GaoLChuFLiuXChenJZhangMZhangY.Effects of occupational therapy synchronized with dual transcranial direct current stimulation on upper limb function and electroencephalography power in subacute stroke patients: a randomized, double-blind, controlled study. PLoS ONE2025; 20: e0320142.
18.
NETS Trial Collaboration Group. Efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation to the ipsilesional motor cortex in subacute stroke (NETS): a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Reg Health Eur2024; 38: 100825.
19.
HesseSWaldnerAMehrholzJTomelleriCPohlMWernerC.Combined transcranial direct current stimulation and robot-assisted arm training in subacute stroke patients: an exploratory, randomized multicenter trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2011; 25: 838–846.
20.
HsuSPLuCFLinBF, et al. Effects of bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients: a double-blind, randomized sham-controlled trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil2023; 20: 27.
21.
Bernal-JiménezJJDileoneMMordillo-MateosL, et al. Combining transcranial direct current stimulation with hand robotic rehabilitation in chronic stroke patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2024; 103: 875–882.
22.
KashooFZAl-BaradieRSAlzahraniM, et al. Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation augmented with motor imagery and upper-limb functional training for upper-limb stroke rehabilitation: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health2022; 19: 15199.
23.
KimDYParkCIJungKJ, et al. Improvement of chronic post-stroke hemiparetic upper limb function after 2 week transcranial direct current stimulation. J Korean Acad Rehabil Med2009; 33: 5–11.
24.
KimSH.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 Dis2021; 30: 105928.
25.
KimDYLimJYKangEK, et al. Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor recovery in patients with subacute stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2010; 89: 879–886.
26.
KohCLLinJHJengJSHuangSLHsiehCL.Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation with sensory modulation on stroke motor rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2017; 98: 2477–2484.
27.
LeeSHLeeGKimJ, et al. Resting-state hemodynamic changes and effects on upper limb function after multi-channel transcranial direct current stimulation to the ipsilesional primary motor cortex and anterior intraparietal sulcus in stroke patients: an fNIRS pilot study. J Neuroeng Rehabil2025; 22: 83.
28.
LiCChenYTuS, et al. Dual-tDCS combined with sensorimotor training promotes upper limb function in subacute stroke patients: a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled study. CNS Neurosci Ther2024; 30: e14530.
29.
LindenbergRRengaVZhuLLNairDSchlaugG.Bihemispheric brain stimulation facilitates motor recovery in chronic stroke patients. Neurology2010; 75: 2176–2184.
30.
LiuYWHuangLZhangSX, et al. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with virtual reality training on upper limb function of stroke patient: a pilot randomized controlled single-blind trial. West China Med J2020; 35: 544–549.
31.
MazzoleniSTranVDDarioPPosteraroF.Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with wrist robot-assisted rehabilitation on motor recovery in subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng2019; 27: 1458–1466.
32.
MazzoleniSTranVDIardellaL, et al. Randomized, sham-controlled trial based on transcranial direct current stimulation and wrist robot-assisted integrated treatment on subacute stroke patients: intermediate results. In: 2017 International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), London, 17–20 July 2017, pp.555–560. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
33.
NairDGRengaVLindenbergRZhuLSchlaugG.Optimizing recovery potential through simultaneous occupational therapy and non-invasive brain-stimulation using tDCS. Restor Neurol Neurosci2011; 29: 411–420.
34.
PintoEFGuptaAKulkarniGBAndradeC.A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study of transcranial direct current stimulation as an augmentation intervention for the attenuation of motor deficits in patients with stroke. J ECT2021; 37: 281–290.
35.
PiresRBaltarASanchezMP, et al. Do higher transcranial direct current stimulation doses lead to greater gains in upper limb motor function in post-stroke patients?Int J Environ Res Public Health2023; 20: 1279.
36.
PrathumTPiriyaprasarthPAneksanB, et al. Effects of home-based dual-hemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation combined with exercise on upper and lower limb motor performance in patients with chronic stroke. Disabil Rehabil2022; 44: 3868–3879.
37.
RochaSSilvaEFoersterÁ, et al. 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 Rehabil2016; 38: 653–660.
38.
SchlaugGCassarlyCFeldJA, et al. Safety and efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation in addition to constraint-induced movement therapy for post-stroke motor recovery (TRANSPORT2): a phase 2, multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled triple-blind trial. Lancet Neurol2025; 24: 400–412.
39.
ShaheiwolaNZhangBJiaJZhangD.Using tDCS as an add-on treatment prior to FES therapy in improving upper limb function in severe chronic stroke patients: a randomized controlled study. Front Hum Neurosci2018; 12: 233.
40.
StraudiSFregniFMartinuzziCPavarelliCSalvioliSBasagliaN.TDCS and robotics on upper limb stroke rehabilitation: effect modification by stroke duration and type of stroke. Biomed Res Int2016; 2016: 5068127.
41.
SunFBZhangXFJinZHChenTT.Effect of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation over premotor cortex on upper limb motor function in severe stroke patients. Chin J Rehabil Theory Pract2023; 29: 1333–1338.
42.
TakahashiMTCBalardinJBBazánPRBoasquevisqueDSAmaro JuniorEConfortoAB.Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation in the initial weeks post-stroke: a pilot randomized study. Einstein (Sao Paulo)2024; 22: eAO0450.
43.
TangCZCaiQYangXCaiQMaMSunW.Transcranial direct current stimulation enhances the effect of task-oriented training in the rehabilitation of upper limb dysfunction after stroke. Chin J Phys Med Rehabil2019; 41: 570–574.
44.
TaudBLindenbergRDarkowR, et al. Limited add-on effects of unilateral and bilateral transcranial direct current stimulation on visuo-motor grip force tracking task training outcome in chronic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Front Neurol2021; 12: 736075.
45.
TedlaJSRodriguesEFerreiraAS, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation combined with trunk-targeted, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation in subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. PeerJ2022; 10: e13329.
46.
TriccasLTBurridgeJHHughesAVerheydenGDesikanMRothwellJ.A double-blinded randomised controlled trial exploring the effect of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation and uni-lateral robot therapy for the impaired upper limb in sub-acute and chronic stroke. Neurorehabilitation2015; 37: 181–191.
47.
VianaRTLaurentinoGESouzaRJ, et al. Effects of the addition of transcranial direct current stimulation to virtual reality therapy after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Neurorehabilitation2014; 34: 437–446.
48.
WeiYYKohCLHsuMJLoS-KChenC-HLinJ-H.Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation on upper extremity motor function in patients with stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2022; 101: 145–151.
49.
YagüeSVecianaMMartínez-YélamosA, et al. Effects of bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation combined with repetitive peripheral nerve stimulation in acute stroke patients. J Clin Neurophysiol2023; 40: 63–70.
50.
YaoXCuiLWangJFengWBaoYXieQ.Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation with virtual reality on upper limb function in patients with ischemic stroke: a randomized controlled trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil2020; 17: 73.
51.
ChowADShinJWangHKellawanJMPereiraHM.Influence of transcranial direct current stimulation dosage and associated therapy on motor recovery post-stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Aging Neurosci2022; 14: 821915.
52.
ZengYChengRZhangL, et al. Clinical comparison between HD-tDCS and tDCS for improving upper limb motor function: a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled trial. Neural Plast2024; 2024: 2512796.
53.
Van der GroenOGhoshMNormanR, et al. Point of view on outcome prediction models in post-stroke motor recovery. Neurorehabil Neural Repair2024; 38: 386–398.
54.
LiaoWWLinCYHorngYSChenC-LLeeT-HWuC-Y.Transcranial direct current stimulation over the motor and premotor cortex with mirror therapy improves motor control, muscle function, and brain activity in chronic stroke: a double-blind randomized sham-controlled trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil2025; 22: 98.
55.
CaulfieldKAGeorgeMS.Optimized APPS-tDCS electrode position, size, and distance doubles the on-target stimulation magnitude in 3000 electric field models. Sci Rep2022; 12: 20116.
56.
LeowLAJiangJBowersSZhangYDuxPEFilmerHL.Intensity-dependent effects of tDCS on motor learning are related to dopamine. Brain Stimul2024; 17: 553–560.
57.
VestringSWolfEDinkelackerJ, et al. Lasting effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on the inducibility of synaptic plasticity by paired-associative stimulation in humans. J Neuroeng Rehabil2024; 21: 162.
58.
VimolratanaOAneksanBSiripornpanichV, et al. Effects of anodal tDCS on resting state EEG power and motor function in acute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil2024; 21: 6.
59.
AgboadaDMosayebi-SamaniMKuoMFNitscheMA.Induction of long-term potentiation-like plasticity in the primary motor cortex with repeated anodal transcranial direct current stimulation: better effects with intensified protocols. Brain Stimul2020; 13: 987–997.
JamilABatsikadzeGKuoHI, et al. Current intensity- and polarity-specific online and aftereffects of transcranial direct current stimulation: an fMRI study. Hum Brain Mapp2020; 41: 1644–1666.
62.
BattistiALazzaroGUrsumandoL, et al. Examining tolerability, safety, and blinding in 1032 transcranial electrical stimulation sessions for children and adolescents with neuropsychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. Sci Rep2025; 15: 4560.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
