A Series of N-of-1 Trials Characterizing Individual Responses to Theta-Burst Stimulation in Post-traumatic Trigeminal Neuropathic Pain.

Several participants improved over time, but improvements followed both active and sham sessions and did not show a consistent treatment-specific pattern. The study mainly demonstrates a way to study individual responses.

Kothari M, Renner N, Devendran AD, Alves-Costa S, Blicher JU, Svensson P, Kothari SF.
The Journal of Pain · Publication date: 2026-10-02
Added to site: 2026-10-03
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2026.106458

Publication date verified in PubMed. This source date is separate from the site's addition date.

Modalities

TMS, Theta-burst stimulation

Clinical focus

Post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathic pain, N-of-1 trials, Individual treatment response

Population

Patients with post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathic pain

Sample

8 patients, mean age 48 plus or minus 16 years

Intervention / method

Participants received alternating active continuous theta-burst stimulation and sham sessions over four weeks, targeting the primary somatosensory face area, with end-of-treatment, one-month and three-month assessments

Comparator

Active and sham sessions within each participant, randomized to active-sham-active-sham or the reverse sequence

Clinician summary

Pain decreased in five participants at end of treatment and one month, and in four at three months. Perceptual-distortion and psychosocial trajectories varied, supporting individualized analysis but not a consistent active-stimulation effect.

How to interpret the findings

Only eight people participated. Repeated active and sham periods may carry over into later periods, blinding was limited to participants, and the abstract reports no consistent treatment-specific pattern. Detailed adverse events, session parameters and individual effect estimates were not exposed.

Equipment and disclosures

Theta-burst stimulation targeted the primary somatosensory cortex face area. The checked abstract does not identify the coil, navigation method or manufacturer.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. Crossref identifies support from the International Association for the Study of Pain.

Related evidence

Compare findings from the same clinical area, including mixed results.