Cargando…

Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting

Transcranial magnetic studies typically rely on measures of active and resting motor threshold (i.e. AMT, RMT). Previous work has demonstrated that adaptive threshold hunting approaches are efficient for estimating RMT. To date, no study has compared motor threshold estimation approaches for measure...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ah Sen, Christelle B., Fassett, Hunter J., El-Sayes, Jenin, Turco, Claudia V., Hameer, Mahdiya M., Nelson, Aimee J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5628904/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28982146
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186007
_version_ 1783268963235397632
author Ah Sen, Christelle B.
Fassett, Hunter J.
El-Sayes, Jenin
Turco, Claudia V.
Hameer, Mahdiya M.
Nelson, Aimee J.
author_facet Ah Sen, Christelle B.
Fassett, Hunter J.
El-Sayes, Jenin
Turco, Claudia V.
Hameer, Mahdiya M.
Nelson, Aimee J.
author_sort Ah Sen, Christelle B.
collection PubMed
description Transcranial magnetic studies typically rely on measures of active and resting motor threshold (i.e. AMT, RMT). Previous work has demonstrated that adaptive threshold hunting approaches are efficient for estimating RMT. To date, no study has compared motor threshold estimation approaches for measures of AMT, yet this measure is fundamental in transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies that probe intracortical circuits. The present study compared two methods for acquiring AMT and RMT: the Rossini-Rothwell (R-R) relative-frequency estimation method and an adaptive threshold-hunting method based on maximum-likelihood parameter estimation by sequential testing (ML-PEST). AMT and RMT were quantified via the R-R and ML-PEST methods in 15 healthy right-handed participants in an experimenter-blinded within-subject study design. AMT and RMT estimations obtained with both the R-R and ML-PEST approaches were not different, with strong intraclass correlation and good limits of agreement. However, ML-PEST required 17 and 15 fewer stimuli than the R-R method for the AMT and RMT estimation, respectively. ML-PEST is effective in reducing the number of TMS pulses required to estimate AMT and RMT without compromising the accuracy of these estimates. Using ML-PEST to estimate AMT and RMT increases the efficiency of the TMS experiment as it reduces the number of pulses to acquire these measures without compromising accuracy. The benefits of using the ML-PEST approach are amplified when multiple target muscles are tested within a session.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5628904
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56289042017-10-20 Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting Ah Sen, Christelle B. Fassett, Hunter J. El-Sayes, Jenin Turco, Claudia V. Hameer, Mahdiya M. Nelson, Aimee J. PLoS One Research Article Transcranial magnetic studies typically rely on measures of active and resting motor threshold (i.e. AMT, RMT). Previous work has demonstrated that adaptive threshold hunting approaches are efficient for estimating RMT. To date, no study has compared motor threshold estimation approaches for measures of AMT, yet this measure is fundamental in transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies that probe intracortical circuits. The present study compared two methods for acquiring AMT and RMT: the Rossini-Rothwell (R-R) relative-frequency estimation method and an adaptive threshold-hunting method based on maximum-likelihood parameter estimation by sequential testing (ML-PEST). AMT and RMT were quantified via the R-R and ML-PEST methods in 15 healthy right-handed participants in an experimenter-blinded within-subject study design. AMT and RMT estimations obtained with both the R-R and ML-PEST approaches were not different, with strong intraclass correlation and good limits of agreement. However, ML-PEST required 17 and 15 fewer stimuli than the R-R method for the AMT and RMT estimation, respectively. ML-PEST is effective in reducing the number of TMS pulses required to estimate AMT and RMT without compromising the accuracy of these estimates. Using ML-PEST to estimate AMT and RMT increases the efficiency of the TMS experiment as it reduces the number of pulses to acquire these measures without compromising accuracy. The benefits of using the ML-PEST approach are amplified when multiple target muscles are tested within a session. Public Library of Science 2017-10-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5628904/ /pubmed/28982146 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186007 Text en © 2017 Ah Sen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Ah Sen, Christelle B.
Fassett, Hunter J.
El-Sayes, Jenin
Turco, Claudia V.
Hameer, Mahdiya M.
Nelson, Aimee J.
Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting
title Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting
title_full Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting
title_fullStr Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting
title_full_unstemmed Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting
title_short Active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting
title_sort active and resting motor threshold are efficiently obtained with adaptive threshold hunting
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5628904/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28982146
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186007
work_keys_str_mv AT ahsenchristelleb activeandrestingmotorthresholdareefficientlyobtainedwithadaptivethresholdhunting
AT fassetthunterj activeandrestingmotorthresholdareefficientlyobtainedwithadaptivethresholdhunting
AT elsayesjenin activeandrestingmotorthresholdareefficientlyobtainedwithadaptivethresholdhunting
AT turcoclaudiav activeandrestingmotorthresholdareefficientlyobtainedwithadaptivethresholdhunting
AT hameermahdiyam activeandrestingmotorthresholdareefficientlyobtainedwithadaptivethresholdhunting
AT nelsonaimeej activeandrestingmotorthresholdareefficientlyobtainedwithadaptivethresholdhunting