Home-Based Wearable rTMS Therapy for Moderate to Severe Depression

August 19, 2026 updated by: Shanghai Mental Health Center

Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing Wearable Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Home-Based Treatment of Depression

Background and Rationale

With rapid economic development and increasing societal pressures, the incidence of neuropsychiatric disorders has risen annually, ranking as the leading cause of disability worldwide and imposing a severe societal burden. Among these, depressive disorders represent a primary contributor. However, the efficacy and accessibility of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for depression face significant challenges. Key limitations include:

Low targeting accuracy with traditional localization methods. Limited clinical penetration of individualized precision paradigms .

In this context, wearable repetitive TMS (wrTMS) technology offers a transformative solution. The rTMS-Tiny device, developed by the Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, exemplifies this innovation with the following features:

Battery-powered with a pulse capacity exceeding 8,000 pulses per charge. Ultra-lightweight design: Total system weight <3 kg, coil helmet <2 kg (10% of conventional devices).

Performance parity: Comparable efficacy to standard rTMS systems while enabling protocols like Stanford Accelerated Intelligent Neuromodulation Therapy (SAINT) .

Advantages of rTMS-Tiny Portable Design and Wearable Application Ergonomically optimized helmet allows near-unrestricted daily activities during treatment .

Streamlined Operational Workflow Simplified protocols significantly reduce clinician workload . Enhanced Treatment Tolerability Improved comfort increases treatment completion rates and long-term adherence, directly enhancing therapeutic outcomes .

These advantages enable high-dose, intensive regimens (e.g., SAINT-like protocols) in routine clinical practice .

Scientific Imperative for a Multicenter RCT

A multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) of rTMS-Tiny is clinically and scientifically warranted to:

Test two core hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: Efficacy of rTMS-Tiny in reducing depressive symptoms. Hypothesis 2: Safety of home-based rTMS-Tiny administration . Generate high-level evidence to advance neuromodulation into an era of precision, personalization, and artificial intelligence-driven therapy .

Study Overview

Status

Not yet recruiting

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

124

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

      • Shanghai, China
        • Shanghai Mental Health Center (SMHC)

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

1. Inclusion Criteria

  1. Demographics Aged 18-65 years, any gender. Minimum education: primary school completion (≥6 years of formal education).
  2. Diagnostic and Severity Requirements Meet DSM-5 criteria for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). Current moderate-to-severe depressive episode, defined by Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 17-item (HAMD-17) score ≥18 .
  3. Pharmacological Stability Stable antidepressant regimen for ≥4 weeks prior to enrollment, restricted to SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors).

    Treatment-naïve patients permitted if no psychotropic medications used within the prior 4 weeks.

    Mandatory maintenance of the same regimen throughout the study and post-treatment follow-up.

  4. Technical Feasibility Medically eligible for both structural MRI and resting-state functional MRI (fMRI) examinations.

2. Exclusion Criteria

  1. Psychiatric Comorbidities Any concurrent psychiatric diagnosis (e.g., autism spectrum disorder, severe cognitive impairment, epilepsy, mania, psychosis) .
  2. Neurological Structural Abnormalities Structural brain lesions increasing seizure risk or disrupting neural connectivity (e.g., brain tumors, history of stroke).
  3. Systemic Medical Conditions Unstable cardiovascular, respiratory, hepatic, renal diseases, or active malignancies.
  4. Contraindications to Procedures TMS contraindications: Metallic implants, pacemakers, history of epilepsy. MRI contraindications: Ferromagnetic implants, claustrophobia requiring sedation.
  5. Recent Neuromodulation Therapies Prior ECT (Electroconvulsive Therapy) or rTMS (repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation) within 3 months.

History of neurosurgical interventions for depression (e.g., deep brain stimulation).

6)Special Populations Pregnancy, lactation, or planning pregnancy during the study. 7)Medication Instability Planned adjustments to pharmacotherapy during the study period. 3. Withdrawal and Discontinuation Criteria

  1. Participant-Initiated Withdrawal Voluntary withdrawal: Participant withdraws consent (e.g., refusal to risk assignment to sham stimulation group).
  2. Investigator-Initiated Withdrawal Non-compliance with inclusion criteria: Post-randomization discovery of ineligibility (e.g., symptom remission, medication non-adherence).

    Serious Adverse Events (SAEs):

    TMS-related SAEs (e.g., seizure, intractable headache, exacerbated suicidality).

  3. Study Discontinuation

Prespecified Efficacy Stoppage:

Interim analysis at n=30/group showing superiority of active intervention (Cohen's d >0.8) .

Safety-Driven Discontinuation:

Unacceptable risk profile (e.g., recurrent SAEs such as seizures or suicidality).

Loss to Follow-Up:

Trial termination if attrition rate exceeds pre-specified thresholds compromising statistical power (e.g., >20% dropout).

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: rTMS-Tiny Treatment Group

Stimulation protocol using the rTMS-Tiny device with identical parameters to SNT:

Stimulation mode Intermittent Theta-Burst Stimulation (iTBS) Burst composition: Each burst consists of 3 pulses at 50 Hz Train structure: 10 bursts repeated at 5 Hz per train (total train duration: 2 seconds) Inter-train interval: 8 seconds

Session parameters Pulses per session: 1,800 pulses Session duration: 570 seconds (≈9.5 minutes) Inter-session interval: 50 minutes Daily frequency: 10 sessions per day Weekly schedule: 5 days per week Treatment course: 1 week (total 50 sessions) Total pulses per course: 1,800 pulses/session × 50 sessions = 90,000 pulses

Stimulation protocol using the rTMS-Tiny device with identical parameters to SNT:

Stimulation mode Intermittent Theta-Burst Stimulation (iTBS) Burst composition: Each burst consists of 3 pulses at 50 Hz Train structure: 10 bursts repeated at 5 Hz per train (total train duration: 2 seconds) Inter-train interval: 8 seconds Session parameters Pulses per session: 1,800 pulses Session duration: 570 seconds (≈9.5 minutes) Inter-session interval: 50 minutes Daily frequency: 10 sessions per day Weekly schedule: 5 days per week Treatment course: 1 week (total 50 sessions) Total pulses per course: 1,800 pulses/session × 50 sessions = 90,000 pulses

Placebo Comparator: rTMS-Tiny Sham Stimulation Group
The key difference lies in the use of a sham stimulation coil instead of the rTMS-Tiny active treatment coil.
The key difference lies in the use of a sham stimulation coil instead of the rTMS-Tiny active treatment coil.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change From Baseline in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) Total Score
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Depressive symptom severity was assessed using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17; total score range, 0-52, with higher scores indicating more severe depression;Treatment Response Rate:≥50% reduction from baseline in HAMD-17 total score;Treatment Remission Rate:Post-treatment HAMD-17 Score < 8)
T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Depressive symptom severity assessed with the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), a 10-item clinician-rated scale. The total score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 60 (maximum); higher scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms (worse outcome), and lower scores indicate improvement.
T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) Total Score
Time Frame: During treT1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month fatment
Depressive symptom severity assessed with the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), a 21-item self-report scale. The total score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 63 (maximum); higher scores indicate more severe depressive symptoms (worse outcome), and lower scores indicate improvement.
During treT1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month fatment
Change in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) Total Score
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Anxiety symptom severity assessed with the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), a 14-item clinician-rated scale. The total score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 56 (maximum); higher scores indicate more severe anxiety symptoms (worse outcome), and lower scores indicate improvement.
T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Change in Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) Total Score
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Overall psychological distress assessed with the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), a 53-item self-report scale (each item rated 0-4),from 0 (minimum) to 212 (maximum). The Global Severity Index (GSI) ranges from 0 (minimum) to 4 (maximum); higher scores indicate greater psychological distress (worse outcome), and lower scores indicate improvement.
T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Change in Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) Total Score
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Insomnia severity assessed with the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), a 7-item self-report scale. The total score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 28 (maximum); higher scores indicate more severe insomnia (worse outcome), and lower scores indicate improvement.
T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Change in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Total Score
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Global cognitive function assessed with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a clinician-administered screening tool covering visuospatial/executive function, attention, language, memory, abstraction, and orientation. The total score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 30 (maximum); higher scores indicate better cognitive function (better outcome), and lower scores indicate worsening.
T1 (Baseline )Day 0, prior to the first rTMS session; T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Treatment Participation Rate
Time Frame: T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Treatment adherence assessed as the participation rate: the number of rTMS treatment sessions actually completed by each participant, expressed as a percentage of the total number of scheduled treatment sessions. Unit of measure: percentage of scheduled sessions completed.
T2 (Mid-peri-procedural period (~Month 6 ±2 weeks)); T3 ( End of peri-procedural period (within 1 week of last session) ); T4 (4-week follow-up); T5 (3-month follow-up); T6 (6-month follow-up)
Treatment Completion Rate (Percentage of Participants Completing the Full Planned rTMS Course)
Time Frame: At end of the peri-procedural period (within 1 week after the last rTMS session)
Treatment adherence assessed as the completion rate: the percentage of enrolled participants who complete the full planned course of rTMS treatment. Unit of measure: percentage of participants.
At end of the peri-procedural period (within 1 week after the last rTMS session)
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) as Assessed by CTCAE v4.0
Time Frame: Throughout the peri-procedural period, from the first rTMS session through 1 week after the last session
Safety and tolerability assessed as the number and incidence of participants experiencing treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), with severity graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 (Grade 1, mild, to Grade 5, death related to the adverse event).
Throughout the peri-procedural period, from the first rTMS session through 1 week after the last session

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

August 20, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

May 30, 2028

Study Completion (Estimated)

June 30, 2028

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 13, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 19, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

August 20, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 20, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 19, 2026

Last Verified

August 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • SMHCGXY-3

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe