Different motor learning effects on excitability changes of motor cortex in muscle contraction state

Dynamic motor practice improves movement accuracy, force control and leads to increased corticospinal excitability compared to isometric motor practice

The central nervous system has a remarkable ability to plan motor actions, to predict and monitor the sensory consequences during and following motor actions and integrate these into future actions. Numerous studies investigating human motor learning have employed tasks involving either force control during isometric contractions or position control during dynamic tasks. To our knowledge, it remains to be elucidated how motor practice with an emphasis on position control influences force control and vice versa. Furthermore, it remains unexplored whether these distinct types of motor practice are accompanied by differential effects on corticospinal excitability. In this study, we tested motor accuracy and effects of motor practice in a force or position control task allowing wrist flexions of the non-dominant hand in the absence of online visual feedback. For each trial, motor performance was quantified as errors (pixels) between the displayed target and the movement endpoint. In the main experiment, 46 young adults were randomized into three groups: position control motor practice (PC), force control motor practice (FC), and a resting control group (CON). Following assessment of baseline motor performance in the position and force control tasks, intervention groups performed motor practice with, augmented visual feedback on performance. Motor performance in both tasks was assessed following motor practice. In a supplementary experiment, measures of corticospinal excitability were obtained in twenty additional participants by application of transcranial magnetic stimulation to the primary motor cortex hot spot of the flexor carpi radialis muscle before and following either position or force control motor practice. Following motor practice, accuracy in the position task improved significantly more for PC compared to FC and CON. For the force control task, both the PC and FC group improved more compared to CON. The two types of motor practice thus led to distinct effects including positive between-task transfer accompanying dynamic motor practice The results of the supplementary study demonstrated an increase in corticospinal excitability following dynamic motor practice compared to isometric motor practice. In conclusion, dynamic motor practice improves movement accuracy, and force control and leads to increased corticospinal excitability compared to isometric motor practice.

Change in motor cortex activation for muscle release by motor learning

For central nervous system disorders' rehabilitation, it is important to accurately understand motor control and implement an appropriate motor learning process to induce neuroplastic changes. The neurophysiological studies have revealed that neural control mechanisms are crucial during both the onset of muscular activities and muscle release after contraction. When performing various movements during daily activities, muscle relaxation control enables precise force output and timing control. Moreover, surround inhibition is a functional mechanism in the motor system. Surround inhibition of the motor system may be involved in the selective execution of desired movements. This review demonstrates cortical excitability resulting from motor learning, movement control mechanisms including muscle relaxation and the suppression of nontarget muscle groups, and the voluntary drive's importance that is required for movement.

Differential corticomotor mechanisms of ankle motor control in post stroke individuals with and without motor evoked potentials

OBJECTIVE

Deficits in ankle motor control has been identified as a significant contributor to impaired walking after stroke. Corticomotor excitability has been related to impaired upper limb motor control and poor recovery in stroke, however contributions to lower limb function are still unclear. This study used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to determine the influence of corticomotor characteristics on lower limb motor control in chronic stroke survivors.

METHODS

This retrospective study assessed 28 individuals with post stroke hemiparesis. Motor evoked potentials (MEP) measured from the paretic and non-paretic tibialis anterior (TA) muscles were used to calculate corticomotor excitability symmetry (CME_sym) and relative ipsilateral corticomotor excitability (ICE). Participants were assigned to MEP+ and MEP- groups depending on the presence (+) or absence (-) of MEPs. Ankle motor control was quantified by the ability of participants to track a sinusoidal target using dorsiflexion-plantarflexion movements of the paretic ankle and tracking error was calculated using root mean square error (RMSE).

RESULTS

Multiple linear regression model for all participants revealed only CME_sym and FMLE (p < 0.01) to significantly predict RMSE. In the MEP+ group, CME_sym significantly predicted RMSE (p = 0.03) while FMLE (p = 0.02) was a significant predictor for the MEP-.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that CME_sym between the ipsilesional and contralesional hemispheres does not necessarily translate to better paretic ankle motor control in chronic stroke. Presence or absence of a MEP in the TA muscle did not affect the ankle tracking performance, however, it was noted that different strategies maybe used by those with and without a MEP.

Neurophysiological Analysis of Intermanual Transfer in Motor Learning

The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of motor training on motor imagery (MI), by comparing motor performance and motor cortex excitability changes with and without intermanual transfer of motor learning. Intermanual transfer was investigated in terms of excitability changes in the motor cortex and motor performance from right hand training to left hand performance. Participants were assigned to a transfer training group and a control group. We recorded motor evoked potentials (MEPs) induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), applied to the left extensor carpi radialis (ECR) both with and without intermanual transfer. The results showed that after learning by the right hand, MEPs decreased during left hand MI. MEPs during MI were significantly decreased by unilateral training in the transfer training group. Since intermanual transfer plays an important role in stabilizing performance by the contralateral side, this result suggests that unilateral training decreases MEPs during MI on the contralateral side. In the control group, without right hand training, MEPs significantly increased after left hand training during MI. In the trained side, we found increased excitability in the agonist muscle area of the primary motor cortex. However, in the untrained side, excitability decreased in the homonymous muscle area of the primary motor cortex. This constitutes an increase in inhibitory effects and suggests that excitability changes in the respective neural circuit contribute to skilled performance by the ipsilateral and contralateral sides in the same motor task.

A novel protocol to investigate motor training-induced plasticity and sensorimotor integration in the cerebellum and motor cortex

Our group set out to develop a sensitive technique, capable of detecting output changes from the posterior fossa following a motor acquisition task. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was applied over the right cerebellar cortex 5 ms in advance of test stimuli over the left cerebral motor cortex (M1), suppressing test motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) recorded in a distal hand muscle. Ten participants typed the letters Z, D, F, and P in randomized 8-letter sequences for ∼15 min, and 10 participants took part in the control condition. Cerebellar-M1 recruitment curves were established before and after the motor acquisition task. Cerebellar inhibition at 50% (CBI50) was defined as the intensity of cerebellar-M1 stimulations that produced MEPs that were 50% of the initial test MEP. Collection also occurred at stimulator intensities 5 and 10% above CBI50. A significant interaction effect of group (experimental and control) vs. time (pre- and postintervention) was observed [F(1,18) = 4.617, P = 0.046]. Post hoc tests showed a significant effect for the learning task in the experimental group [F(1,9) = 10.28, P = 0.01]. Further analysis showed specific disinhibition at CBI50 (P = 0.04), CBI50+5% (P = 0.008), and CBI50+10% (P = 0.01) for the experimental group only. Reaction time (P < 0.001) and accuracy (P = 0.006) improved significantly following practice, implying that disinhibition coincides with motor learning. No changes, however, were seen in the control condition. We conclude that this protocol is a sensitive technique that may be used to study cerebellar disinhibition with motor acquisition in vivo.