No Impact of Cerebellar Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation at Three Different Timings on Motor Learning in a Sequential Finger-Tapping Task

Towards optimized methodological parameters for maximizing the behavioral effects of transcranial direct current stimulation

Introduction

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) administers low-intensity direct current electrical stimulation to brain regions via electrodes arranged on the surface of the scalp. The core promise of tDCS is its ability to modulate brain activity and affect performance on diverse cognitive functions (affording causal inferences regarding regional brain activity and behavior), but the optimal methodological parameters for maximizing behavioral effects remain to be elucidated. Here we sought to examine the effects of 10 stimulation and experimental design factors across a series of five cognitive domains: motor performance, visual search, working memory, vigilance, and response inhibition. The objective was to identify a set of optimal parameter settings that consistently and reliably maximized the behavioral effects of tDCS within each cognitive domain.

Methods

We surveyed tDCS effects on these various cognitive functions in healthy young adults, ultimately resulting in 721 effects across 106 published reports. Hierarchical Bayesian meta-regression models were fit to characterize how (and to what extent) these design parameters differentially predict the likelihood of positive/negative behavioral outcomes.

Results

Consistent with many previous meta-analyses of tDCS effects, extensive variability was observed across tasks and measured outcomes. Consequently, most design parameters did not confer consistent advantages or disadvantages to behavioral effects-a domain-general model suggested an advantage to using within-subjects designs (versus between-subjects) and the tendency for cathodal stimulation (relative to anodal stimulation) to produce reduced behavioral effects, but these associations were scarcely-evident in domain-specific models.

Discussion

These findings highlight the urgent need for tDCS studies to more systematically probe the effects of these parameters on behavior to fulfill the promise of identifying causal links between brain function and cognition.

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor learning in healthy elderly individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is widely used in motor recovery. Nevertheless, whether tDCS improves motor learning in healthy older adults is still controversial. This review aims to investigate the effectiveness of tDCS on motor learning in healthy elderly individuals.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Embase databases were initially searched from inception to December 5, 2022. The standard mean difference (SMD) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were analysed via random-effect models.

RESULTS

Compared with the sham group, no significant effects were found regarding improvement in motor learning based on the speed or accuracy of the task and reaction time for the tDCS intervention group. After subgroup analysis, a significant effect was found for improved motor learning based on reaction time in the primary motor cortex (M1)-cerebellar group.

CONCLUSIONS

This review revealed that tDCS had no significant effect on improving the speed or accuracy of motor learning in healthy elderly adults. However, it has a significant effect on improving the motor learning ability based on the reaction time of the task (mainly referring to the tDCS stimulation position of M1 and cerebellar), although the results have obvious heterogeneity and uncertainty.

Absence of modulatory effects of 6Hz cerebellar transcranial alternating current stimulation on fear learning in men

Fear is a vital defense mechanism to potential threats, which is influenced by the cerebellum. While the cerebellum's role in acquiring fear responses is well understood, limited knowledge exists about its involvement in fear extinction. In this study, we investigated the effects of cerebellar theta band transcranial alternating current stimulation (ctACS) administered during fear extinction training, based on previous evidence from animal studies suggesting a role of cerebellar theta oscillations in associative memory formation. To this end, thirty-seven healthy right-handed male participants were recruited for a two-day differential fear renewal paradigm. On day 1, they underwent acquisition training in context A followed by extinction training in context B. On day 2, recall was tested in contexts A and B. One group of participants received ctACS in the theta band (6 Hz) during extinction training. The other group received sham ctACS. Although both groups demonstrated the ability to recall previously learned fear and distinguish between low and high threat stimuli, no significant differences were observed between the ctACS and sham groups, indicating that ctACS at this theta frequency range did not impact extinction and recall of previously acquired fear in this study. Nevertheless, using ctACS could still be useful in future research, including brain imaging studies, to better understand how the cerebellum is involved in fear and extinction processes.

Changes in Corticospinal Excitability and Motor Control During Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Healthy Individuals

Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) modulates the primary motor cortex (M1) via cerebellar brain inhibition (CBI), which affects motor control in humans. However, the effects of ctDCS on motor control are inconsistent because of an incomplete understanding of the real-time changes in the M1 excitability that occur during ctDCS, which determines motor output under regulation by the cerebellum. This study investigated changes in corticospinal excitability and motor control during ctDCS in healthy individuals. In total, 37 healthy individuals participated in three separate experiments. ctDCS (2 mA) was applied to the cerebellar hemisphere during the rest condition or a pinch force-tracking task. Motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude and the F-wave were assessed before, during, and after ctDCS, and pinch force control was assessed before and during ctDCS. The MEP amplitudes were significantly decreased during anodal ctDCS from 13 min after the onset of stimulation, whereas the F-wave was not changed. No significant changes in MEP amplitudes were observed during cathodal and sham ctDCS conditions. The MEP amplitudes were decreased during anodal ctDCS when combined with the pinch force-tracking task, and pinch force control was impaired during anodal ctDCS relative to sham ctDCS. The MEP amplitudes were not significantly changed before and after all ctDCS conditions. Motor cortical excitability was suppressed during anodal ctDCS, and motor control was unskilled during anodal ctDCS when combined with a motor task in healthy individuals. Our findings provided a basic understanding of the clinical application of ctDCS to neurorehabilitation.

Test-retest reliability of a finger-tapping fMRI task in a healthy population

Measuring brain activity during functional MRI (fMRI) tasks is one of the main tools to identify brain biomarkers of disease or neural substrates associated with specific symptoms. However, identifying correct biomarkers relies on reliable measures. Recently, poor reliability was reported for task-based fMRI measures. The present study aimed to demonstrate the reliability of a finger-tapping fMRI task across two sessions in healthy participants. Thirty-one right-handed healthy participants aged 18-60 years took part in two MRI sessions 3 weeks apart during which we acquired finger-tapping task-fMRI. We examined the overlap of activations between sessions using Dice similarity coefficients, assessing their location and extent. Then, we compared amplitudes calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) in three sets of regions of interest (ROIs) in the motor network: literature-based ROIs (10-mm-radius spheres centred on peaks of an activation likelihood estimation), anatomical ROIs (regions as defined in an atlas) and ROIs based on conjunction analyses (superthreshold voxels in both sessions). Finger tapping consistently activated expected regions, for example, left primary sensorimotor cortices, premotor area and right cerebellum. We found good-to-excellent overlap of activations for most contrasts (Dice coefficients: .54-.82). Across time, ICCs showed large variability in all ROI sets (.04-.91). However, ICCs in most ROIs indicated fair-to-good reliability (mean = .52). The least specific contrast consistently yielded the best reliability. Overall, the finger-tapping task showed good spatial overlap and fair reliability of amplitudes on group level. Although caution is warranted in interpreting correlations of activations with other variables, identification of activated regions in response to a task and their between-group comparisons are still valid and important modes of analysis in neuroimaging to find population tendencies and differences.

Robust enhancement of motor sequence learning with 4 mA transcranial electric stimulation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Motor learning experiments with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) at 2 mA have produced mixed results. We hypothesize that tDCS boosts motor learning provided sufficiently high field intensity on the motor cortex.

METHODS

In a single-blinded design, 108 healthy participants received either anodal (N = 36) or cathodal (N = 36) tDCS at 4 mA total, or no stimulation (N = 36) while they practiced a 12-min sequence learning task. Anodal stimulation was delivered across four electrode pairs (1 mA each), with anodes above the right parietal lobe and cathodes above the right frontal lobe. Cathodal stimulation, with reversed polarities, served as an active control for sensation, while the no-stimulation condition established baseline performance. fMRI-localized targets on the primary motor cortex in 10 subjects were used in current flow models to optimize electrode placement for maximal field intensity. A single electrode montage was then selected for all participants.

RESULTS

We found a significant difference in performance with anodal vs. cathodal stimulation (Cohen's d = 0.71) and vs. no stimulation (d = 0.56). This effect persisted for at least 1 h, and subsequent learning for a new sequence and the opposite hand also improved. Sensation ratings were comparable in the active groups and did not exceed moderate levels. Current flow models suggest the new electrode montage can achieve stronger motor cortex polarization than alternative montages.

CONCLUSION

The present paradigm shows a medium to large effect size and is well-tolerated. It may serve as a go-to experiment for future studies on motor learning and tDCS.