Neuroenhancement in surgeons: benefits, risks and ethical dilemmas.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons traditionally aim to reduce mistakes in healthcare through repeated training and advancement of surgical technology. Recently, performance-enhancing interventions such as neurostimulation are emerging which may offset errors in surgical practice. METHODS: Use of transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS), a novel neuroenhancement technique that has been applied to surgeons to improve surgical technical performance, was reviewed. Evidence supporting tDCS improvements in motor and cognitive performance outside of the field of surgery was assessed and correlated with emerging research investigating tDCS in the surgical setting and potential applications to wider aspects of healthcare. Ethical considerations and future implications of using tDCS in surgical training and perioperatively are also discussed. RESULTS: Outside of surgery, tDCS studies demonstrate improved motor performance with regards to reaction time, task completion, strength and fatigue, while also suggesting enhanced cognitive function through multitasking, vigilance and attention assessments. In surgery, current research has demonstrated improved performance in open knot-tying, laparoscopic and robotic skills while also offsetting subjective temporal demands. However, a number of ethical issues arise from the potential application of tDCS in surgery in the form of safety, coercion, distributive justice and fairness, all of which must be considered prior to implementation. CONCLUSION: Neuroenhancement may improve motor and cognitive skills in healthcare professions with impact on patient safety. Implementation will require accurate protocols and regulations to balance benefits with the associated ethical dilemmas, and to direct safe use for clinicians and patients.

ANTECEDENTES: Los cirujanos tratan de reducir sus errores durante la atención médica mediante el entrenamiento reiterado y los avances tecnológicos. Recientemente, han surgido otras opciones para mejorar el rendimiento, como la neuroestimulación que puede subsanar los errores en la práctica quirúrgica. MÉTODOS: Se revisó la utilización de la estimulación transcraneal de corriente directa (transcranial direct-current stimulation, tDCS), una técnica de estimulación neurológica que se ha aplicado a cirujanos para mejorar su rendimiento técnico. Se revisaron las evidencias que dan soporte a la mejoría en el rendimiento motor y cognitivo tras tDCS en otros ámbitos más allá de la cirugía y se correlacionó con datos recientes obtenidos en el entorno quirúrgico y sus posibles aplicaciones a otras áreas de la atención médica. También se discuten aspectos éticos y las implicaciones que la utilización de la tDCS pudiera tener en el entrenamiento quirúrgico y perioperatorio. RESULTADOS: Al margen de la cirugía, los estudios de tDCS demuestran una mejoría en el rendimiento motor medido por el tiempo de reacción, de finalización de tareas, de fuerza y la fatiga, así como también sugieren un incremento de la función cognitiva a través de evaluaciones multitarea, de vigilancia y de atención. En cirugía, la investigación actual ha demostrado una mejoría en el rendimiento para la realización de nudos abiertos, habilidades laparoscópicas y robóticas, mientras también contrarresta las exigencias subjetivas materiales. Sin embargo, surgen aspectos éticos ante la posible aplicación de la tDCS en cirugía, como son la seguridad, la coerción, la justicia distributiva y la equidad, situaciones que deben considerarse antes de su implementación. CONCLUSIÓN: La estimulación neurológica puede mejorar las habilidades motoras y cognitivas de los profesionales sanitarios con repercusión en la seguridad del paciente. Su implementación requerirá de protocolos y regulaciones específicas para equilibrar los beneficios con los dilemas éticos asociados y garantizar su seguridad para médicos y pacientes.

Transcranial electrical stimulation for human enhancement and the risk of inequality: Prohibition or compensation?

Non-invasive brain stimulation is used to modulate brain excitation and inhibition and to improve cognitive functioning. The effectiveness of the enhancement due to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is still controversial, but the technique seems to have large potential for improvement and more specific applications. In particular, it has recently been used by athletes, both beginners and professionals. This paper analyses the ethical issues related to tDCS enhancement, which depend on its specific features: ease of use, immediate effect, non-detectability and great variability of effects. If tDCS were to become widespread, there could be some potential side effects, especially the rise of inequality in many selective competitive contexts. I discuss two possible scenarios to counter this effect: that of prohibition and that of compensation, each supported by reasons and arguments that seem plausible and worthy of consideration. In conclusion, I show why I think the scenario of compensation is the preferable one.

Learning while multitasking: short and long-term benefits of brain stimulation.

We employed a simulated production task that mimics the real-world skill acquisition required of operators working in control rooms of power plants to assess short and long-term effects of transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS). tRNS has shown potential for enhancing learning and performance of cognitive skills. Forty subjects (24 female) learned how to execute the simulated production task during the training phase and were required to perform a secondary task during the skill acquisition phase while they received active (12 min) or sham tRNS on DLPFC. After 2 weeks they had to recall the task again without any stimulation. The results demonstrate that tRNS promoted better multitasking as reflected by better performance in a secondary task during and immediately after tRNS. However, 2 weeks later, beneficial effect of tRNS on retention was moderated by general mental ability. Particularly, tRNS benefited those with lower general mental ability. Practitioner summary: By using a simulated production task, we assessed the effects of tRNS on learning and skill retention. The study indicates that neurostimulation can enhance the learning of multiple complex tasks. Moreover, it shows that retention of those tasks can be supported by neurostimulation, especially for those with lower general mental ability.

The practices of do-it-yourself brain stimulation: implications for ethical considerations and regulatory proposals.

Scientists and neuroethicists have recently drawn attention to the ethical and regulatory issues surrounding the do-it-yourself (DIY) brain stimulation community, which comprises individuals stimulating their own brains with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for self-improvement. However, to date, existing regulatory proposals and ethical discussions have been put forth without engaging those involved in the DIY tDCS community or attempting to understand the nature of their practices. I argue that to better contend with the growing ethical and safety concerns surrounding DIY tDCS, we need to understand the practices of the community. This study presents the results of a preliminary inquiry into the DIY tDCS community, with a focus on knowledge that is formed, shared and appropriated within it. I show that when making or acquiring a device, DIYers (as some members call themselves) produce a body of knowledge that is completely separate from that of the scientific community, and share it via online forums, blogs, videos and personal communications. However, when applying tDCS, DIYers draw heavily on existing scientific knowledge, posting links to academic journal articles and scientific resources and adopting the standardised electrode placement system used by scientists. Some DIYers co-opt scientific knowledge and modify it by creating their own manuals and guides based on published papers. Finally, I explore how DIYers cope with the methodological limitations inherent in self-experimentation. I conclude by discussing how a deeper understanding of the practices of DIY tDCS has important regulatory and ethical implications.

Challenges of proper placebo control for non-invasive brain stimulation in clinical and experimental applications.

A range of techniques are now available for modulating the activity of the brain in healthy people and people with neurological conditions. These techniques, including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial current stimulation (tCS, which includes direct and alternating current), create magnetic or electrical fields that cross the intact skull and affect neural processing in brain areas near to the scalp location where the stimulation is delivered. TMS and tCS have proved to be valuable tools in behavioural neuroscience laboratories, where causal involvement of specific brain areas in specific tasks can be shown. In clinical neuroscience, the techniques offer the promise of correcting abnormal activity, such as when a stroke leaves a brain area underactive. As the use of brain stimulation becomes more commonplace in laboratories and clinics, we discuss the safety and ethical issues inherent in using the techniques with human participants, and we suggest how to balance scientific integrity with the safety of the participant.

Owning Ethical Innovation: Claims about Commercial Wearable Brain Technologies.

The wearable neurotechnology market targets consumers with promises of cognitive benefit and personal wellness. Scientific evidence is essential to substantiate claims about utility, safety, and efficacy and for informed choice and public trust.

Primum non nocere or primum facere meliorem? Hacking the brain in the 21st century.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that modulates cortical excitability. It is devoid of serious adverse events and exerts variable effects on cognition, with several research findings suggesting that it can improve memory, verbal and mathematical skills. Because tDCS devices are low-cost, portable and relatively easy to assemble, they have become available outside of the medical setting and used for non-medical ("cosmetic") purposes by laypersons. In this sense, tDCS has become a popular technique aiming to improve cognition and the achievement of a better performance not only at work, but also in other fields such as sports, leisure activities (video games) and even the military. In spite of these unforeseen developments, there has been a general paralysis of the medical and regulatory agencies to develop guidelines for the use of tDCS for cosmetic purposes. Several challenges are present, most importantly, how to restrict tDCS use outside of the medical setting in face of variable and sometimes conflicting results from scientific research. This article aims to describe the popular use of tDCS, in light of the pillars of neuroethics, a branch of bioethics relative to brain research. Between two possible but extreme solutions - total release or total restriction of tDCS - it is paramount to develop a spectrum of alternatives, which may vary over time and in different cultural backgrounds.

Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines.

Low intensity transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) in humans, encompassing transcranial direct current (tDCS), transcutaneous spinal Direct Current Stimulation (tsDCS), transcranial alternating current (tACS), and transcranial random noise (tRNS) stimulation or their combinations, appears to be safe. No serious adverse events (SAEs) have been reported so far in over 18,000 sessions administered to healthy subjects, neurological and psychiatric patients, as summarized here. Moderate adverse events (AEs), as defined by the necessity to intervene, are rare, and include skin burns with tDCS due to suboptimal electrode-skin contact. Very rarely mania or hypomania was induced in patients with depression (11 documented cases), yet a causal relationship is difficult to prove because of the low incidence rate and limited numbers of subjects in controlled trials. Mild AEs (MAEs) include headache and fatigue following stimulation as well as prickling and burning sensations occurring during tDCS at peak-to-baseline intensities of 1-2mA and during tACS at higher peak-to-peak intensities above 2mA. The prevalence of published AEs is different in studies specifically assessing AEs vs. those not assessing them, being higher in the former. AEs are frequently reported by individuals receiving placebo stimulation. The profile of AEs in terms of frequency, magnitude and type is comparable in healthy and clinical populations, and this is also the case for more vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly persons, or pregnant women. Combined interventions (e.g., co-application of drugs, electrophysiological measurements, neuroimaging) were not associated with further safety issues. Safety is established for low-intensity 'conventional' TES defined as <4mA, up to 60min duration per day. Animal studies and modeling evidence indicate that brain injury could occur at predicted current densities in the brain of 6.3-13A/m2 that are over an order of magnitude above those produced by tDCS in humans. Using AC stimulation fewer AEs were reported compared to DC. In specific paradigms with amplitudes of up to 10mA, frequencies in the kHz range appear to be safe. In this paper we provide structured interviews and recommend their use in future controlled studies, in particular when trying to extend the parameters applied. We also discuss recent regulatory issues, reporting practices and ethical issues. These recommendations achieved consensus in a meeting, which took place in Göttingen, Germany, on September 6-7, 2016 and were refined thereafter by email correspondence.

Prison research: a bioethics or an ethics issue? / Investigación en prisión: ¿una cuestión de bioética o de ética? / Investigação em contexto prisional: Um questão de bioética ou de ética?

Abstract: The hypothesis of reducing aggressiveness through transcranial direct current stimulation was recently tested on a cohort of inmates in Spain. The experiment, including 1.5 mA electric shocks, was an external research initiative that received the initial acquiescence of the carceral system. An alarm was raised at the time the research was published, encouraging the directorate of prisons to stop the ongoing replication of the experiment. Nevertheless, no (bio)ethics committee, in the universities or among bioethics experts, has questioned the research. In this think piece, we aim to again discuss some ethical approaches to these clinical interventions on crime. After its positivistic period, the field of criminology has been questioning the simple psychobiological approach to crime because of the reductionistic view of this phenomenon and its harmful consequences. Thus, we address academic experimentation under prison governance and the "re" roles of prisons. We argue that the minor disadvantages of such research, if performed with consent, could be positive if the research can minimize the harmfulness of prison itself; thus, penitentiary treatment and science should go together. Prison administrations, in addition to their duty to protect the individuals under their control from ethically biased research, must promote reintegration. We conclude that human rights are over criminal policy and science and that ethics are over narrower bioethics.

Resumen: La hipótesis de la reducción de la agresividad por medio de estimulaciones transcraneales ha sido recientemente testada sobre encarcelados en España. El experimento, que incluyó descargas eléctricas de 1.5mA, fue una iniciativa de investigadores externos que encontró la aquiescencia inicial del sistema carcelario. La alarma surgió en el momento en que se publicó la investigación, alentando a la dirección de las prisiones a detener la replicación del experimento. Sin embargo, hasta entonces, ningún comité encontró ningún inconveniente, ni en las universidades ni entre expertos en bioética. En este artículo de reflexión pretendemos argumentar algunos enfoques éticos de estas intervenciones clínicas sobre la delincuencia. De nuevo, ya que la criminología, después de su periodo positivista, ha venido cuestionado el mero enfoque psicobiológico de la delincuencia. Así, abordamos el experimento académico dentro de la gobernanza penitenciaria y los roles "re" de las prisiones. Argumentamos que no es tanto que no se pueda investigar con internos, sino que posibles inconvenientes de tales investigaciones puedan servir, bajo consentimiento, para minimizar los inconvenientes de la misma pena de prisión. La administración, además del deber de proteger a sus individuos de investigaciones éticamente sesgadas ha de fomentar la reintegración. Concluimos que los derechos humanos han de estar por encima de la política criminal y de la ciencia, y la ética por encima de una más limitada bioética.

Resumo: A hipótese de diminuir a agressividade através da estimulação elétrica transcraniana foi recentemente testada num grupo de reclusos em Espanha. A experiência, que incluiu choques elétricos de 1,5mA, partiu de uma iniciativa de investigadores externos que encontraram a aquiescência no sistema prisional. O alarme surgiu no momento em que a investigação foi publicada, o que levou a direção administrativa das prisões a interromper a replicação do estudo. No entanto, até ao momento, nenhuma comissão de (bio)ética encontrou qualquer inconveniente, nem nas universidades, nem entre os especialistas em bioética. Com este artigo, pretendemos discutir algumas abordagens éticas dessas intervenções clínicas no crime. A criminologia tem vindo a questionar, após o seu período de investigação positivista, a abordagem psicobiológica do crime, devido à visão redutora desse fenómeno e das suas consequências nefastas. Assim, neste artigo, abordamos a experiência académica dentro da governança prisional e os fins da prisão. Concluímos que as pequenas desvantagens da investigação seriam positivas se pudessem, sob consentimento, minimizar os malefícios da própria prisão, o que significa que o tratamento penitenciário e a ciência deveriam andar 'de mãos dadas'. A administração das prisões, para além do dever de proteger os indivíduos de estudos que acarretem problemas éticos, deve promover a reintegração. Concluímos, assim, que os direitos humanos estão acima da política e da ciência criminais, e a ética acima da bioética mais restrita.

Memory Interventions in the Criminal Justice System: Some Practical Ethical Considerations.

In recent years, discussion around memory modification interventions has gained attention. However, discussion around the use of memory interventions in the criminal justice system has been mostly absent. In this paper we start by highlighting the importance memory has for human well-being and personal identity, as well as its role within the criminal forensic setting; in particular, for claiming and accepting legal responsibility, for moral learning, and for retribution. We provide examples of memory interventions that are currently available for medical purposes, but that in the future could be used in the forensic setting to modify criminal offenders' memories. In this section we contrast the cases of (1) dampening and (2) enhancing memories of criminal offenders. We then present from a pragmatic approach some pressing ethical issues associated with these types of memory interventions. The paper ends up highlighting how these pragmatic considerations can help establish ethically justified criteria regarding the possibility of interventions aimed at modifying criminal offenders' memories.

Primum non nocere or primum facere meliorem? Hacking the brain in the 21st century / Primum non nocere ou primum facem meliorem? O cérebro pirateado do século 21

Abstract Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that modulates cortical excitability. It is devoid of serious adverse events and exerts variable effects on cognition, with several research findings suggesting that it can improve memory, verbal and mathematical skills. Because tDCS devices are low-cost, portable and relatively easy to assemble, they have become available outside of the medical setting and used for non-medical ("cosmetic") purposes by laypersons. In this sense, tDCS has become a popular technique aiming to improve cognition and the achievement of a better performance not only at work, but also in other fields such as sports, leisure activities (video games) and even the military. In spite of these unforeseen developments, there has been a general paralysis of the medical and regulatory agencies to develop guidelines for the use of tDCS for cosmetic purposes. Several challenges are present, most importantly, how to restrict tDCS use outside of the medical setting in face of variable and sometimes conflicting results from scientific research. This article aims to describe the popular use of tDCS, in light of the pillars of neuroethics, a branch of bioethics relative to brain research. Between two possible but extreme solutions - total release or total restriction of tDCS - it is paramount to develop a spectrum of alternatives, which may vary over time and in different cultural backgrounds.

Resumo A estimulação transcraniana por corrente contínua (ETCC) é uma técnica não invasiva de estimulação cerebral que modula a excitabilidade cortical. A ETCC é desprovida de efeitos adversos graves e exerce efeitos variáveis sobre a cognição, com vários achados de pesquisa sugerindo que a técnica pode promover melhora nas habilidades mnêmica, verbal e matemática. Devido ao seu baixo custo, portabilidade e facilidade de montagem, os aparelhos de ETCC tornaram-se disponíveis fora do contexto médico, sendo usados para fins não médicos ("cosméticos") por indivíduos leigos. Nesse sentido, a ETCC tornou-se um procedimento popular para aprimoramento da cognição e a realização de melhor desempenho não somente no ambiente de trabalho, mas também em campos tais como o esporte, atividades de lazer ( video games ) e até no meio militar. Apesar desses acontecimentos imprevisíveis, há uma certa morosidade das agências médicas e regulatórias em desenvolver diretrizes para o uso de ETCC para fins cosméticos. Há muitos desafios presentes, principalmente, como restringir o uso da ETCC fora do contexto médico em face de resultados variáveis, e muitas vezes conflitantes, da pesquisa científica sobre o tema. Este artigo tem como objetivo descrever o uso popular da ETCC sob a luz da neuroética, um ramo da bioética que se dedica ao estudo do cérebro. Entre duas situações possíveis, mas extremas - liberação ou restrição totais da ETCC -, é primordial o desenvolvimento de um espectro de alternativas, que podem variar ao longo do tempo e depender de diversos contextos culturais.