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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shraim, Muath A., Massé‐Alarie, Hugo, Salomoni, Sauro E., Hodges, Paul W.
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