An Acute Application of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Does Not Improve Motor Performance in Parkinson's Disease

Motor Learning in a Complex Motor Task Is Unaffected by Three Consecutive Days of Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation

Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) delivered to the primary motor cortex (M1) can increase cortical excitability, entrain neuronal firing patterns, and increase motor skill acquisition in simple motor tasks. The primary aim of this study was to assess the impact of tACS applied to M1 over three consecutive days of practice on the motor learning of a challenging overhand throwing task in young adults. The secondary aim was to examine the influence of tACS on M1 excitability. This study implemented a double-blind, randomized, SHAM-controlled, between-subjects experimental design. A total of 24 healthy young adults were divided into tACS and SHAM groups and performed three identical experimental sessions that comprised blocks of overhand throwing trials of the right dominant arm concurrent with application of tACS to the left M1. Performance in the overhand throwing task was quantified as the endpoint error. Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were assessed in the right first dorsal interosseus (FDI) muscle with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to quantify changes in M1 excitability. Endpoint error was significantly decreased in the post-tests compared with the pre-tests when averaged over the three days of practice (p = 0.046), but this decrease was not statistically significant between the tACS and SHAM groups (p = 0.474). MEP amplitudes increased from the pre-tests to the post-tests (p = 0.003), but these increases were also not different between groups (p = 0.409). Overall, the main findings indicated that tACS applied to M1 over multiple days does not enhance motor learning in a complex task to a greater degree than practice alone (SHAM).

Non-Dominant Hemisphere Excitability Is Unaffected during and after Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Dominant Hemisphere

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) increases primary motor cortex (M1) excitability and improves motor performance when applied unilaterally to the dominant hemisphere. However, the influence of tDCS on contralateral M1 excitability both during and after application has not been quantified. The purpose was to determine the influence of tDCS applied to the dominant M1 on the excitability of the contralateral non-dominant M1. This study employed a double-blind, randomized, SHAM-controlled, within-subject crossover experimental design. Eighteen young adults performed two experimental sessions (tDCS, SHAM) in counterbalanced order separated by a one-week washout. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to quantify the excitability of the contralateral M1 to which anodal tDCS was applied for 20 min with a current strength of 1 mA. Motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitudes were assessed in 5 TMS test blocks (Pre, D5, D10, D15, and Post). The Pre and Post TMS test blocks were performed immediately before and after tDCS application, whereas the TMS test blocks performed during tDCS were completed at the 5, 10, and 15 min stimulation timepoints. MEPs were analyzed with a 2 condition (tDCS, SHAM) × 5 test (Pre, D5, D10, D15, Post) within-subject ANOVA. The main effect for condition (p = 0.213), the main effect for test (p = 0.502), and the condition × test interaction (p = 0.860) were all not statistically significant. These results indicate that tDCS does not modulate contralateral M1 excitability during or immediately after application, at least under the current set of common tDCS parameters of stimulation.

Exploring the Influence of Inter-Trial Interval on the Assessment of Short-Interval Intracortical Inhibition

Short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) is a common paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measure used to assess primary motor cortex (M1) interneuron activity in healthy populations and in neurological disorders. Many of the parameters of TMS stimulation to most accurately measure SICI have been determined. However, one TMS parameter that has not been investigated is the time between SICI trials (termed inter-trial interval; ITI). This is despite a series of single-pulse TMS studies which have reported that motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude were suppressed for short, but not long ITIs in approximately the initial ten trials of a TMS block of 20-30 trials. The primary purpose was to examine the effects of ITI on the quantification of SICI at rest. A total of 23 healthy adults completed an experimental session that included four SICI trial blocks. Each block utilized a different ITI (4, 6, 8, and 10 s) and was comprised of a total of 26 SICI trials divided into three epochs. ANOVA revealed that the main effects for ITI and epoch as well as their interaction were all non-statistically significant for SICI. We conclude that the shorter (4-6 s) ITIs used in studies investigating SICI should not alter the interpretation of M1 activity, while having the advantages of being more comfortable to participants and reducing the experimental time needed to evaluate perform single and paired-pulse TMS experiments.

The Influence of Different Inter-Trial Intervals on the Quantification of Intracortical Facilitation in the Primary Motor Cortex

Intracortical facilitation (ICF) is a paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measurement used to quantify interneuron activity in the primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy populations and motor disorders. Due to the prevalence of the technique, most of the stimulation parameters to optimize ICF quantification have been established. However, the underappreciated methodological issue of the time between ICF trials (inter-trial interval; ITI) has been unstandardized, and different ITIs have never been compared in a paired-pulse TMS study. This is important because single-pulse TMS studies have found motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude reductions over time during TMS trial blocks for short, but not long ITIs. The primary purpose was to determine the influence of different ITIs on the measurement of ICF. Twenty adults completed one experimental session that involved 4 separate ICF trial blocks with each utilizing a different ITI (4, 6, 8, and 10 s). Two-way ANOVAs indicated no significant ITI main effects for test MEP amplitudes, condition-test MEP amplitudes, and therefore ICF. Accordingly, all ITIs studied provided nearly identical ICF values when averaged over entire trial blocks. Therefore, it is recommended that ITIs of 4-6 s be utilized for ICF quantification to optimize participant comfort and experiment time efficiency.

Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Applied over Multiple Days Does Not Enhance Motor Learning of a Complex Overhand Throwing Task in Young Adults

Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) enhances motor skill and learning in relatively simple motor tasks, but it is unclear if c-tDCS can improve motor performance in complex motor tasks. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of c-tDCS applied over multiple days on motor learning in a complex overhand throwing task. In a double-blind, randomized, between-subjects, SHAM-controlled, experimental design, 30 young adults were assigned to either a c-tDCS or a SHAM group. Participants completed three identical experiments on consecutive days that involved overhand throwing in a pre-test block, five practice blocks with concurrent c-tDCS, and a post-test block. Overhand throwing endpoint accuracy was quantified as the endpoint error. The first dorsal interosseous muscle motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to quantify primary motor cortex (M1) excitability modulations via c-tDCS. Endpoint error significantly decreased over the 3 days of practice, but the magnitude of decrease was not significantly different between the c-tDCS and SHAM group. Similarly, MEP amplitude slightly increased from the pre-tests to the post-tests, but these increases did not differ between groups. These results indicate that multi-day c-tDCS does not improve motor learning in an overhand throwing task or increase M1 excitability.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of Primary Motor Cortex over Multiple Days Improves Motor Learning of a Complex Overhand Throwing Task

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied to the primary motor cortex (M1) improves motor learning in relatively simple motor tasks performed with the hand and arm. However, it is unknown if tDCS can improve motor learning in complex motor tasks involving whole-body coordination with significant endpoint accuracy requirements. The primary purpose was to determine the influence of tDCS on motor learning over multiple days in a complex over-hand throwing task. This study utilized a double-blind, randomized, SHAM-controlled, between-subjects experimental design. Forty-six young adults were allocated to either a tDCS group or a SHAM group and completed three experimental sessions on three consecutive days at the same time of day. Each experimental session was identical and consisted of overhand throwing trials to a target in a pre-test block, five practice blocks performed simultaneously with 20 min of tDCS, and a post-test block. Overhand throwing performance was quantified as the endpoint error. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to obtain motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) from the first dorsal interosseus muscle to quantify changes in M1 excitability due to tDCS. Endpoint error significantly decreased over the three days of practice in the tDCS group but not in the SHAM group. MEP amplitude significantly increased in the tDCS group, but the MEP increases were not associated with increases in motor learning. These findings indicate that tDCS applied over multiple days can improve motor learning in a complex motor tasks in healthy young adults.

The Influence of Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation on Fatigue Resistance

Previous research has shown that some forms of non-invasive brain stimulation can increase fatigue resistance. The purpose of this study is to determine the influence of transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) on the time to task failure (TTF) of a precision grip task. The study utilized a randomized, double-blind, SHAM-controlled, within-subjects design. Twenty-six young adults completed two experimental sessions (tACS and SHAM) with a 7-day washout period between sessions. Each session involved a fatiguing isometric contraction of the right hand with a precision grip with either a tACS or SHAM stimulation applied to the primary motor cortex (M1) simultaneously. For the fatiguing contraction, the participants matched an isometric target force of 20% of the maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) force until task failure. Pre- and post-MVCs were performed to quantify the force decline due to fatigue. Accordingly, the dependent variables were the TTF and MVC force decline as well as the average EMG activity, force error, and standard deviation (SD) of force during the fatiguing contractions. The results indicate that there were no significant differences in any of the dependent variables between the tACS and SHAM conditions (p value range: 0.256-0.820). These findings suggest that tACS does not increase the TTF during fatiguing contractions in young adults.

A Single Application of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Fails to Enhance Motor Skill Acquisition in Parkinson's Disease: A Pilot Study

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that leads to numerous impairments in motor function that compromise the ability to perform activities of daily living. Practical and effective adjunct therapies are needed to complement current treatment approaches in PD. Transcranial direct current stimulation applied to the cerebellum (c-tDCS) can increase motor skill in young and older adults. Because the cerebellum is involved in PD pathology, c-tDCS application during motor practice could potentially enhance motor skill in PD. The primary purpose was to examine the influence of c-tDCS on motor skill acquisition in a complex, visuomotor isometric precision grip task (PGT) in PD in the OFF-medication state. The secondary purpose was to determine the influence of c-tDCS on transfer of motor skill in PD. The study utilized a double-blind, SHAM-controlled, within-subjects design. A total of 16 participants completed a c-tDCS condition and a SHAM condition in two experimental sessions separated by a 7-day washout period. Each session involved practice of the PGT concurrent with either c-tDCS or SHAM. Additionally, motor transfer tasks were quantified before and after the practice and stimulation period. The force error in the PGT was not significantly different between the c-tDCS and SHAM conditions. Similarly, transfer task performance was not significantly different between the c-tDCS and SHAM conditions. These findings indicate that a single session of c-tDCS does not elicit acute improvements in motor skill acquisition or transfer in hand and arm tasks in PD while participants are off medications.

Acute Effect of Single-Session Cerebellar Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Static and Dynamic Balance in Healthy Volunteers

Several studies have shown the positive effect of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (ctDCS) on balance in patients and older adults. However, in healthy volunteers, the results are conflicting. We aimed to investigate the immediate effect of anodal ctDCS on the dynamic-static balance in healthy, non-athletic young adults due to the possible benefits for sports performance. Twenty-one healthy volunteers participated in two consecutive 20 min sessions of ctDCS (2 mA current intensity), with 1-week intervals (anodal ctDCS-sham ctDCS). Flamingo and Y-Balance tests were used to evaluate the static and dynamic balances before and after the ctDCS. A Continuous Performance Test (CPT) was used to evaluate the changes in sustained attention, impulsivity, and vigilance. A repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the changes in balance scores, reaction time, omission, and commission numbers. There were no statistically significant differences in dynamic and static balance scores and in CPT parameters between conditions. In conclusion, there was no immediate neuromodulation effect of anodal ctDCS to improve balance performance in healthy, young individuals. Furthermore, no evidence was found to support the use of cerebellar tDCS to improve sports performance.

A meta-analytical review of transcranial direct current stimulation parameters on upper limb motor learning in healthy older adults and people with Parkinson's disease

Current literature lacks consolidated evidence for the impact of stimulation parameters on the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in enhancing upper limb motor learning. Hence, we aim to synthesise available methodologies and results to guide future research on the usage of tDCS on upper limb motor learning, specifically in older adults and Parkinson's disease (PD). Thirty-two studies (Healthy older adults, N = 526, M = 67.25, SD = 4.30 years; PD, N = 216, M = 66.62, SD = 6.25 years) were included in the meta-analysis. All included studies consisted of active and sham protocols. Random effect meta-analyses were conducted for (i) subjects (healthy older adults and PD); (ii) intensity (1.0, 1.5, 2 mA); (iii) electrode montage (unilateral anodal, bilateral anodal, unilateral cathodal); (iv) stimulation site (cerebellum, frontal, motor, premotor, SMA, somatosensory); (v) protocol (online, offline). Significant tDCS effect on motor learning was reported for both populations, intensity 1.0 and 2.0 mA, unilateral anodal and cathodal stimulation, stimulation site of the motor and premotor cortex, and both online and offline protocols. Regression showed no significant relationship between tDCS effects and density. The efficacy of tDCS is also not affected by the number of sessions. However, studies that reported only single session tDCS found significant negative association between duration with motor learning outcomes. Our findings suggest that different stimulation parameters enhanced upper limb motor learning in older adults and PD. Future research should combine tDCS with neuroimaging techniques to help with optimisation of the stimulation parameters, considering the type of task and population.

The Influence of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Shooting Performance in Elite Deaflympic Athletes: A Case Series

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to improve motor learning in numerous studies. However, only a few of these studies have been conducted on elite-level performers or in complex motor tasks that have been practiced extensively. The purpose was to determine the influence of tDCS applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) on motor learning over multiple days on 10-m air rifle shooting performance in elite Deaflympic athletes. Two male and two female elite Deaflympic athletes (World, European, and National medalists) participated in this case series. The study utilized a randomized, double-blind, SHAM-controlled, cross-over design. Anodal tDCS or SHAM stimulation was applied to the left DLPFC for 25 min with a current strength of 2 mA concurrent with three days of standard shooting practice sessions. Shooting performance was quantified as the points and the endpoint error. Separate 2 Condition (DLPFC-tDCS, SHAM) × 3 Day (1,2,3) within-subjects ANOVAs revealed no significant main effects or interactions for either points or endpoint error. These results indicate that DLPFC-tDCS applied over multiple days does not improve shooting performance in elite athletes. Different stimulation parameters or very long-term (weeks/months) application of tDCS may be needed to improve motor learning in elite athletes.

Therapeutic Devices for Motor Symptoms in Parkinson’s Disease: Current Progress and a Systematic Review of Recent Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Pharmacotherapy is the first-line treatment option for Parkinson’s disease, and levodopa is considered the most effective drug for managing motor symptoms. However, side effects such as motor fluctuation and dyskinesia have been associated with levodopa treatment. For these conditions, alternative therapies, including invasive and non-invasive medical devices, may be helpful. This review sheds light on current progress in the development of devices to alleviate motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease.

Methods

We first conducted a narrative literature review to obtain an overview of current invasive and non-invasive medical devices and thereafter performed a systematic review of recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of these devices.

Results

Our review revealed different characteristics of each device and their effectiveness for motor symptoms. Although invasive medical devices are usually highly effective, surgical procedures can be burdensome for patients and have serious side effects. In contrast, non-pharmacological/non-surgical devices have fewer complications. RCTs of non-invasive devices, especially non-invasive brain stimulation and mechanical peripheral stimulation devices, have proven effectiveness on motor symptoms. Nearly no non-invasive devices have yet received Food and Drug Administration certification or a CE mark.

Conclusion

Invasive and non-invasive medical devices have unique characteristics, and several RCTs have been conducted for each device. Invasive devices are more effective, while non-invasive devices are less effective and have lower hurdles and risks. It is important to understand the characteristics of each device and capitalize on these.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Parkinson's Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Clinical impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) alone for Parkinson's disease (PD) is still a challenge. Thus, there is a need to synthesize available results, analyze methodologically and statistically, and provide evidence to guide tDCS in PD.

Objective: Investigate isolated tDCS effect in different brain areas and number of stimulated targets on PD motor symptoms.

Methods: A systematic review was carried out up to February 2021, in databases: Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of science. Full text articles evaluating effect of active tDCS (anodic or cathodic) vs. sham or control on motor symptoms of PD were included.

Results: Ten studies (n = 236) were included in meta-analysis and 25 studies (n = 405) in qualitative synthesis. The most frequently stimulated targets were dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and primary motor cortex. No significant effect was found among single targets on motor outcomes: Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) III – motor aspects (MD = −0.98%, 95% CI = −10.03 to 8.07, p = 0.83, I² = 0%), UPDRS IV – dyskinesias (MD = −0.89%, CI 95% = −3.82 to 2.03, p = 0.55, I² = 0%) and motor fluctuations (MD = −0.67%, CI 95% = −2.45 to 1.11, p = 0.46, I² = 0%), timed up and go – gait (MD = 0.14%, CI 95% = −0.72 to 0.99, p = 0.75, I² = 0%), Berg Balance Scale – balance (MD = 0.73%, CI 95% = −1.01 to 2.47, p = 0.41, I² = 0%). There was no significant effect of single vs. multiple targets in: UPDRS III – motor aspects (MD = 2.05%, CI 95% = −1.96 to 6.06, p = 0.32, I² = 0%) and gait (SMD = −0.05%, 95% CI = −0.28 to 0.17, p = 0.64, I² = 0%). Simple univariate meta-regression analysis between treatment dosage and effect size revealed that number of sessions (estimate = −1.7, SE = 1.51, z-score = −1.18, p = 0.2, IC = −4.75 to 1.17) and cumulative time (estimate = −0.07, SE = 0.07, z-score = −0.99, p = 0.31, IC = −0.21 to 0.07) had no significant association.

Conclusion: There was no significant tDCS alone short-term effect on motor function, balance, gait, dyskinesias or motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease, regardless of brain area or targets stimulated.