Can we support the brain after a head injury?

‍

New scientific insights into neuromodulation and personalized neurorehabilitation.

‍

Following a concussion or repeated blows to the head, people can experience long-term symptoms. Concentration problems, memory loss, mental fatigue, headaches, and emotional changes can significantly impact daily functioning.

Some people recover gradually. Others continue to experience symptoms, even when a standard brain scan offers no clear explanation.

But can we specifically support the brain networks that are still functioning to promote recovery and rehabilitation?

That is the central question in a new scientific publication by Prof. Dr. Sven Vanneste,co-founder of BRAI3N,published on October 22, 2026, in the international journal Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics.

In this review article, he examines current scientific knowledge regarding non-invasive neuromodulation following repeated head impact and proposes a new framework for personalized neurorehabilitation.

‍

What happens in the brain after repeated head trauma?

Our brains consist of billions of nerve cells that communicate with each other through extensive networks.

These networks are involved in almost everything we do: thinking, remembering, focusing attention, regulating emotions, and moving.

Repeated head impact can affect the functioning of these networks. This occurs not only through potential damage to nerve cells or their connections but also through changes in communication and activity between different brain regions.

This can lead to a wide range of symptoms, such as:

• problems with attention, memory, and information processing;
• mental fatigue and slowed thinking;
• headaches and other chronic pain issues;
• sleep problems;
• mood changes, irritability, or anxiety;
• balance issues and reduced stamina.

Not everyone develops the same symptoms. Furthermore, persistent symptoms do not automatically mean that there is permanent brain damage or a neurodegenerative condition.

The causes are often complex. Sleep disorders, pain, psychological issues, and other medical factors can contribute to the clinical picture, either individually or in combination.

That is why a comprehensive medical assessment is necessary.

‍

Can brain networks function better again?

An important premise of the research is that not all brain networks are affected in the same way after an injury.

Some connections may be damaged, while other networks continue to function.

Moreover, our brains possess a certain degree of neuroplasticity: the ability to adapt their activity and connections to experiences, training, and changing circumstances.

This forms an important basis for neurorehabilitation.

The research question is whether we can specifically influence the activity of still-functioning brain networks so that they can better contribute to daily functioning.

Not by simply replacing damaged nerve cells, but by potentially enabling existing networks to work together more efficiently or by supporting other networks in taking over certain functions.

Neuromodulation is one of the techniques being used to investigate this possibility.

‍

What role can neuromodulation play?

Neuromodulation encompasses various techniques with which researchers and clinicians attempt to influence the activity of the nervous system.

In the new publication, Prof. Vanneste discusses, among other things:

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS)

With TMS, magnetic pulses are used to influence the activity of specific brain regions.

This technique is already being used for selected psychiatric conditions, including certain forms of depression.

Researchers are also studying whether TMS can contribute to reducing specific symptoms after brain injury, such as mood problems or certain cognitive symptoms.

The results are currently mixed. There is still insufficient evidence that TMS improves overall recovery after repeated head trauma.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)

With tDCS, a weak electrical current is applied via electrodes on the head.

This stimulation can alter the excitability of brain regions, potentially influencing how neural networks respond to training and rehabilitation.

In people with traumatic brain injury, areas such as attention, memory, and cognitive functions have been studied.

Some small studies show promising results, but others find no convincing benefit. Therefore, tDCS is not yet recommended as a routine treatment for memory rehabilitation following brain injury.

New experimental techniques

Targeted ultrasound stimulation, peripheral nerve stimulation, and other innovative techniques are also discussed.

These approaches offer interesting possibilities for influencing brain activity, but their clinical efficacy following repeated head impact has not yet been sufficiently established.

‍

Why is personalized neurorehabilitation so important?

One of the most important conclusions of the publication is that the same treatment is not necessarily suitable for every patient.

Two people may have a similar history of head trauma, yet develop different symptoms.

For one person, memory problems may be at the forefront. For someone else, fatigue, mood issues, or headaches may be the primary factors affecting quality of life.

These symptoms are not necessarily linked to the same brain networks.

Therefore, Prof. Vanneste proposes increasingly focusing treatments on the specific problem and the involved brain network.

This means that researchers must first determine:

1. Which symptom or functional limitation do we want to improve?
2. Which brain networks are involved?
3. Which networks are still functioning well enough to be influenced?
4. Which stimulation technique might be suitable for this?
5. How do we combine any potential stimulation with appropriate rehabilitation?
6. How do we assess whether daily functioning is actually improving?

This approach shifts the focus from a general treatment protocol to a more individual, network-oriented approach.

It is a promising research model, but not yet a proven standard treatment.

‍

How does BRAI3N approach patients with symptoms following a head injury?

At BRAI3N, the collaboration between neuroscience research and clinical care is central.

Our methodology starts from the full spectrum of symptoms and the potential involvement of brain networks.

In doing so, we use four principles that guide our care.

1. Assessment

We begin with a careful assessment of the symptoms and medical history.

We pay attention to the head injury, cognitive issues, fatigue, sleep, mood, pain, previous examinations, and the impact on daily life.

Where appropriate, aqEEG measurement and analysiscan provide additional information about electrical brain activity.

However, a qEEG cannot independently determine what brain damage is present or which neuromodulation treatment will work for an individual patient.

2. Targeted treatment

Based on the clinical assessment, we determine what guidance or treatment might be appropriate.

When neuromodulation is considered, we evaluate the specific indication, scientific evidence, potential risks, and realistic treatment goals.

Neuromodulation is not yet a proven standard treatment for the long-term consequences of repeated head impacts. Where an application is experimental, this must be clearly discussed and requires an appropriate research and safety framework.

3. Stabilization

When a treatment is started, we monitor symptoms and daily functioning.

It is not just changes in test results that are important, but primarily their significance for daily life.

Can someone concentrate better? Have certain activities become less taxing? Is there a change in fatigue or quality of life?

Based on this evaluation, we determine whether further treatment is indicated.

4. Maintenance

When improvement occurs, we discuss how to best maintain the progress achieved.

Further rehabilitation, adapted activities, guidance, and follow-up can play a role in this.

Not every patient goes through these phases in the same way, and neuromodulation is not appropriate for everyone.

‍

What does current science say about recovery after head trauma?

The publication makes an important distinction between promising neurophysiological mechanisms and actually proven clinical treatments.

There are indications that magnetic and electrical stimulation can alter the activity of certain brain networks.

But changes in brain activity do not automatically mean that patients also experience meaningful improvement.

For example, an important double-blind study from 2026 involving 91 people with persistent symptoms after a concussion found no significant benefit of active TMS compared to sham stimulation regarding the overall severity of symptoms.

Therefore, Prof. Vanneste emphasizes that larger, well-controlled studies are necessary, with sufficient attention paid to individual differences and long-term outcomes.

It is also important to distinguish between long-term symptoms after head trauma and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).

CTE is a specific neurodegenerative condition that can currently only be definitively diagnosed after death. Not everyone who has sustained repeated head trauma develops CTE.

There is currently no evidence that neuromodulation can prevent, stop, or reverse CTE.

‍

The future: not just changing brain activity, but improving function

In our view, the main message of this publication is not that there is a new treatment that can repair brain damage.

Its significance lies primarily in a different way of thinking about neurorehabilitation.

We must investigate not only what is damaged, but also which brain networks are still functioning and how these might be better supported.

In this regard, collaboration between neuroscientists, physicians, psychologists, and other rehabilitation specialists is essential.

At BRAI3N, we continue to closely monitor these developments and critically examine how new scientific insights can contribute to better, more individualized care.

Because ultimately, it is not just about changing brain activity.

It is about whether people are able to function better as a result and experience a higher quality of life.

‍

‍

Scientific publication

Vanneste, S. (2026). Non-invasive neuromodulation after repetitive head impacts: current evidence and a precision framework for circuit-based rehabilitation.

Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics. Published online October 22, 2026.

https://doi.org/10.1080/14737175.2026.2753645

‍

‍

By JAN OST - NOVEMBER 07, 2026