Cargando…

Influence of Concurrent Finger Movements on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)-Induced Aftereffects

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been reported to have bidirectional influence on the amplitude of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in resting participants in a polarity-specific manner: anodal tDCS increased and cathodal tDCS decreased them. More recently, the effects of tDCS have b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shirota, Yuichiro, Terney, Daniella, Antal, Andrea, Paulus, Walter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5600944/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28955211
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00169
_version_ 1783264298467852288
author Shirota, Yuichiro
Terney, Daniella
Antal, Andrea
Paulus, Walter
author_facet Shirota, Yuichiro
Terney, Daniella
Antal, Andrea
Paulus, Walter
author_sort Shirota, Yuichiro
collection PubMed
description Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been reported to have bidirectional influence on the amplitude of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in resting participants in a polarity-specific manner: anodal tDCS increased and cathodal tDCS decreased them. More recently, the effects of tDCS have been shown to depend on a number of additional factors. We investigated whether a small variety of movements involving target and non-target muscles could differentially modify the efficacy of tDCS. MEPs were elicited from the right first dorsal interosseous muscle, defined as the target muscle, by single pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1). During M1 tDCS, which lasted for 10 min applying anodal, cathodal, or sham condition, the participants were instructed to squeeze a ball with their right hand (Task 1), to move their right index finger only in the medial (Task 2), in the lateral direction (Task 3), or in medial and lateral direction alternatively (Task 4). Anodal tDCS reduced MEP amplitudes measured in Task 1 and Task 2, but to a lesser extent in the latter. In Task 3, anodal tDCS led to greater MEP amplitudes than cathodal stimulation. Alternating movements resulted in no effect of tDCS on MEP amplitude (Task 4). The results are congruent with the current notion that the aftereffects of tDCS are highly variable relying on a number of factors including the type of movements executed during stimulation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5600944
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56009442017-09-27 Influence of Concurrent Finger Movements on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)-Induced Aftereffects Shirota, Yuichiro Terney, Daniella Antal, Andrea Paulus, Walter Front Behav Neurosci Neuroscience Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been reported to have bidirectional influence on the amplitude of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in resting participants in a polarity-specific manner: anodal tDCS increased and cathodal tDCS decreased them. More recently, the effects of tDCS have been shown to depend on a number of additional factors. We investigated whether a small variety of movements involving target and non-target muscles could differentially modify the efficacy of tDCS. MEPs were elicited from the right first dorsal interosseous muscle, defined as the target muscle, by single pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1). During M1 tDCS, which lasted for 10 min applying anodal, cathodal, or sham condition, the participants were instructed to squeeze a ball with their right hand (Task 1), to move their right index finger only in the medial (Task 2), in the lateral direction (Task 3), or in medial and lateral direction alternatively (Task 4). Anodal tDCS reduced MEP amplitudes measured in Task 1 and Task 2, but to a lesser extent in the latter. In Task 3, anodal tDCS led to greater MEP amplitudes than cathodal stimulation. Alternating movements resulted in no effect of tDCS on MEP amplitude (Task 4). The results are congruent with the current notion that the aftereffects of tDCS are highly variable relying on a number of factors including the type of movements executed during stimulation. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-09-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5600944/ /pubmed/28955211 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00169 Text en Copyright © 2017 Shirota, Terney, Antal and Paulus. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Shirota, Yuichiro
Terney, Daniella
Antal, Andrea
Paulus, Walter
Influence of Concurrent Finger Movements on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)-Induced Aftereffects
title Influence of Concurrent Finger Movements on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)-Induced Aftereffects
title_full Influence of Concurrent Finger Movements on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)-Induced Aftereffects
title_fullStr Influence of Concurrent Finger Movements on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)-Induced Aftereffects
title_full_unstemmed Influence of Concurrent Finger Movements on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)-Induced Aftereffects
title_short Influence of Concurrent Finger Movements on Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)-Induced Aftereffects
title_sort influence of concurrent finger movements on transcranial direct current stimulation (tdcs)-induced aftereffects
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5600944/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28955211
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00169
work_keys_str_mv AT shirotayuichiro influenceofconcurrentfingermovementsontranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationtdcsinducedaftereffects
AT terneydaniella influenceofconcurrentfingermovementsontranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationtdcsinducedaftereffects
AT antalandrea influenceofconcurrentfingermovementsontranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationtdcsinducedaftereffects
AT pauluswalter influenceofconcurrentfingermovementsontranscranialdirectcurrentstimulationtdcsinducedaftereffects