Background: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) imposes a substantial burden on patients and health systems alike: despite established pharmacological and psychological interventions, up to 40% of patients fail to achieve full remission with first-line treatment, driving persistent interest in alternative neuromodulation approaches. Among the neuromodulation strategies under investigation, low-frequency (predominantly 1 Hz), non-neuronavigated repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) represents a surface-coil protocol class distinct from the FDA-cleared deep TMS approach for OCD, yet its effectiveness remains uncertain. Objective: To estimate the pooled effect of low-frequency (predominantly 1 Hz), non-neuronavigated rTMS versus sham stimulation on Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) scores, and to determine whether stimulation target, treatment duration, or frequency systematically moderates that effect within this protocol class. Methods: This PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD420261302647) searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from inception through May 2025. Eligible studies were sham-controlled RCTs reporting Y-BOCS total scores; risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. The primary outcome was the between-group mean difference (MD) in Y-BOCS scores under a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model, selected per pre-specified criteria (random effects if I² ≥50% or Q-test P ≤ 0.1). Pre-specified subgroup analyses examined stimulation target, treatment duration, and frequency. Results: Fourteen RCTs (N = 460; 252 active rTMS, 208 sham or control) were included. The primary pooled analysis yielded a mean difference (MD) in Y-BOCS scores of -0.69 (95% CI: -1.75 to 0.38; P = 0.21; I² = 58%), indicating no statistically significant benefit of rTMS over sham. Moderate heterogeneity was substantially reduced by exclusion of a single outlying trial, without altering the null direction of the estimate. All pre-specified subgroup analyses - by stimulation target (DLPFC vs. SMA), treatment duration (2-12 weeks), and stimulation frequency (1 Hz vs. 10 Hz) - were non-significant, and leave-one-out sensitivity analysis confirmed robustness across all 14 permutations. Conclusion: Pooled evidence from 14 RCTs does not support a statistically significant benefit of low-frequency, non-neuronavigated rTMS over sham for OCD symptom reduction (MD = -0.69, 95% CI: -1.75 to 0.38; P = 0.21). This finding is specific to low-frequency, non-neuronavigated surface-coil protocols and should not be interpreted as evidence against rTMS efficacy more broadly; approved deep TMS and neuronavigated protocols were outside the scope of this review. These results indicate that this low-frequency, non-navigated protocol class lacks demonstrated efficacy in controlled trials. Whether neuronavigation and cortical field verification can bridge this performance gap requires adequately powered trials designed for direct protocol comparison.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: