Cargando…
Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation
Evidence suggests excitability of the motor cortex (M1) changes in response to motor skill learning of the upper limb. Few studies have examined immediate changes in corticospinal excitability and intra‐cortical mechanisms following motor learning in the lower back. Further, it is unknown which tran...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9540878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35501123 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejn.15683 |
_version_ | 1784803801456181248 |
---|---|
author | Shraim, Muath A. Massé‐Alarie, Hugo Salomoni, Sauro E. Hodges, Paul W. |
author_facet | Shraim, Muath A. Massé‐Alarie, Hugo Salomoni, Sauro E. Hodges, Paul W. |
author_sort | Shraim, Muath A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Evidence suggests excitability of the motor cortex (M1) changes in response to motor skill learning of the upper limb. Few studies have examined immediate changes in corticospinal excitability and intra‐cortical mechanisms following motor learning in the lower back. Further, it is unknown which transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) paradigms are likely to reveal changes in cortical function in this region. This study aimed to (1) compare corticospinal excitability and intra‐cortical mechanisms in the lower back region of M1 before and after a single session of lumbopelvic tilt motor learning task in healthy people and (2) compare these measures between two TMS coils and two methods of recruitment curve (RC) acquisition. Twenty‐eight young participants (23.6 ± 4.6 years) completed a lumbopelvic tilting task involving three 5‐min blocks. Single‐pulse (RC from 70% to 150% of active motor threshold) and paired‐pulse TMS measures (ICF, SICF and SICI) were undertaken before (using 2 coils: figure‐of‐8 and double cone) and after (using double cone coil only) training. RCs were also acquired using a traditional and rapid method. A significant increase in corticospinal excitability was found after training as measured by RC intensities, but this was not related to the RC slope. No significant differences were found for paired‐pulse measures after training. Finally, there was good agreement between RC parameters when measured with the two different TMS coils or different acquisition methods (traditional vs. rapid). Changes in corticospinal excitability after a single session of lumbopelvic motor learning task are seen, but these changes are not explained by changes in intra‐cortical mechanisms. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9540878 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95408782022-10-14 Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation Shraim, Muath A. Massé‐Alarie, Hugo Salomoni, Sauro E. Hodges, Paul W. Eur J Neurosci Systems Neuroscience Evidence suggests excitability of the motor cortex (M1) changes in response to motor skill learning of the upper limb. Few studies have examined immediate changes in corticospinal excitability and intra‐cortical mechanisms following motor learning in the lower back. Further, it is unknown which transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) paradigms are likely to reveal changes in cortical function in this region. This study aimed to (1) compare corticospinal excitability and intra‐cortical mechanisms in the lower back region of M1 before and after a single session of lumbopelvic tilt motor learning task in healthy people and (2) compare these measures between two TMS coils and two methods of recruitment curve (RC) acquisition. Twenty‐eight young participants (23.6 ± 4.6 years) completed a lumbopelvic tilting task involving three 5‐min blocks. Single‐pulse (RC from 70% to 150% of active motor threshold) and paired‐pulse TMS measures (ICF, SICF and SICI) were undertaken before (using 2 coils: figure‐of‐8 and double cone) and after (using double cone coil only) training. RCs were also acquired using a traditional and rapid method. A significant increase in corticospinal excitability was found after training as measured by RC intensities, but this was not related to the RC slope. No significant differences were found for paired‐pulse measures after training. Finally, there was good agreement between RC parameters when measured with the two different TMS coils or different acquisition methods (traditional vs. rapid). Changes in corticospinal excitability after a single session of lumbopelvic motor learning task are seen, but these changes are not explained by changes in intra‐cortical mechanisms. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-05-10 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9540878/ /pubmed/35501123 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejn.15683 Text en © 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Neuroscience published by Federation of European Neuroscience Societies and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Systems Neuroscience Shraim, Muath A. Massé‐Alarie, Hugo Salomoni, Sauro E. Hodges, Paul W. Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation |
title | Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation |
title_full | Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation |
title_fullStr | Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation |
title_full_unstemmed | Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation |
title_short | Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation |
title_sort | can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? comparison of single and paired‐pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation |
topic | Systems Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9540878/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35501123 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejn.15683 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shraimmuatha cantrainingofaskilledpelvicmovementchangecorticomotorcontrolofbackmusclescomparisonofsingleandpairedpulsetranscranialmagneticstimulation AT massealariehugo cantrainingofaskilledpelvicmovementchangecorticomotorcontrolofbackmusclescomparisonofsingleandpairedpulsetranscranialmagneticstimulation AT salomonisauroe cantrainingofaskilledpelvicmovementchangecorticomotorcontrolofbackmusclescomparisonofsingleandpairedpulsetranscranialmagneticstimulation AT hodgespaulw cantrainingofaskilledpelvicmovementchangecorticomotorcontrolofbackmusclescomparisonofsingleandpairedpulsetranscranialmagneticstimulation |