Back

Evaluating cranial electrotherapy stimulation for anxiety associated with breathlessness in palliative care: a mixed-methods feasibility study

Bleazard, L.; Copping, S. R.; Booth, S.; Gray, L. J.; Faull, C.; Walker, K.; Griffiths, C.; Wenzel, D.

2026-08-25 palliative medicine
10.64898/2026.08.22.26361094 medRxiv
Show abstract

Objectives To explore the acceptability and tolerability of cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) using Alpha-Stim AID as a potential intervention for anxiety associated with breathlessness in people with advanced chronic respiratory disease. Methods A multicentre, mixed-methods, non-randomised interventional feasibility study with a parallel usual-care control group. Participants were adults with chronic respiratory disease and significant anxiety and breathlessness symptoms (assessed via Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale) receiving care from hospice services. The intervention groups used Alpha-Stim AID for eight weeks either at a fixed or personalised dose, followed by a four-week follow-up period. This feasibility study was not powered to assess clinical efficacy. Results 12.5% of screened patients at the primary site were eligible, and 29 unique participants were recruited. Three participants withdrew from the study (10.3%), none of which were attributable to CES. Most adverse events were mild, with headache reported frequently across control and intervention groups. Outcome measure completion was high, with data missingness below 6.4%. Numerical rating scales of anxiety and breathlessness fluctuated daily and remained broadly static, whereas GAD-7 scores assessing anxiety improved over time across all groups. This feasibility study was not powered to assess clinical efficacy. Conclusion CES using Alpha-Stim AID was deliverable within hospice services and was generally acceptable and tolerable among participants who enrolled. Our findings support further evaluation which should involve a fully-powered randomised controlled trial against a sham device to determine whether CES provides clinically meaningful improvements in anxiety for this patient population.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.