Search

Background Reward-based feedback given during motor learning has been shown to improve the retention of the behaviour being acquired. Interestingly, applying transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) during learning over the primary motor cortex (M1), an area associated with motor retention, also results in enhanced retention of the newly formed motor memories. However, it remains unknown whether combining these distinct interventions result in an additive benefit of motor retention. Methods We investigated whether combining both interventions while participants learned to account for a visuomotor transformation results in enhanced motor retention (total n = 56; each group n = 14). To determine whether these interventions share common physiological mechanisms underpinning learning, we assessed motor cortical excitability and inhibition (i.e. SICI) on a hand muscle before and after all participants learned the visuomotor rotation using their entire arm and hand. Results We found that both the Reward-Stim (i.e. reward + tDCS) and Reward-Sham (i.e. reward-only) groups had increased retention at the beginning of the retention phase, indicating an immediate effect of reward on behaviour. However, each intervention on their own did not enhance retention when compared to sham, but rather, only the combination of both reward and tDCS demonstrated prolonged retention. We also found that only the Reward-Stim group had a significant reduction in SICI after exposure to the perturbation. Conclusions We show that combining both interventions are additive in providing stronger retention of motor adaptation. These results indicate that the reliability and validity of using tDCS within a clinical context may depend on the type of feedback individuals receive when learning a new motor pattern., Highlights • Concurrently administering reward and M1 tDCS during learning results in enhanced motor retention. • The combination of these interventions also leads to a reduction in M1 inhibitory mechanisms. • No benefits of motor retention were found when reward or M1 tDCS were given alone.

Background Effects of age on the assessment of intracortical inhibition with paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) have been variable, which may be due to between-study differences in test TMS intensity and test motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude. Objective To investigate age-related differences in short- (SICI) and long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI) across a range of test TMS intensities and test MEP amplitudes. Methods In 22 young and 18 older subjects, SICI and LICI were recorded at a range of test TMS intensities (110%–150% of motor threshold) while the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle was at rest, or producing a precision grip of the index finger and thumb. Data were subsequently compared according to the amplitude of the MEP produced by the test alone TMS. Results When pooled across all test TMS intensities, SICI in resting muscle and LICI in active muscle were similar in young and older adults, whereas SICI in active muscle and LICI in resting muscle were reduced in older adults. Regrouping data based on test MEP amplitude demonstrated similar effects of age for SICI and LICI in resting muscle, whereas more subtle differences between age groups were revealed for SICI and LICI in active muscle. Conclusions Advancing age influences GABA-mediated intracortical inhibition, but the outcome is dependent on the experimental conditions. Age-related differences in SICI and LICI were influenced by test TMS intensity and test MEP amplitude, suggesting that these are important considerations when assessing intracortical inhibition in older adults, particularly in an active muscle.

Background When using transcranial magnetic stimulation, a stimulation intensity defined as a certain level above the threshold for activation of a hand muscle is commonly used, disregarding the fact that the areas of activation for different muscles may have varying response characteristics intra- and interindividually. Objective To study the response characteristics of different muscles and compare them within and between individuals. Also to investigate the effect of varying stimulation intensity (defined in two different ways) and amplitude criterion for response, on the sizes of the activation areas for different muscles. Methods A system of transcranial magnetic stimulation with navigation capacity where the stimulation intensity can be defined in terms of the electric field strength in the tissue was used. Four different muscles were investigated in healthy adults. The threshold for activation at rest (RMT) of the different muscles and their respective areas of activation were quantified using three different stimulus intensities (100, 110 and 120% RMT) and two criteria for response amplitude (20 and 50 μV). Results Responses could readily be determined using 20 μV as response limit. The RMTs for different muscles varied within and between individuals. The degree to which the area depended on stimulation intensity differed between muscles intra- and interindividually. All results were statistically significant (P Conclusions The response characteristics vary between muscles within an individual and between individuals for a certain muscle. Thus, for optimal accuracy when delineating the activation area, the investigation should be adapted to each particular muscle.

Background The amplitude of compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) evoked in response to magnetic cervical motor root stimulation (MRS) has rarely been used as a diagnostic parameter because of the difficulty in obtaining supramaximal CMAPs. Objective To clarify whether supramaximal CMAPs could be elicited by MRS, and if so, whether their amplitude and area could be used to evaluate the conduction of proximal motor roots. Method With the use of a custom-made high-power magnetic stimulator, the CMAPs evoked in response to MRS of the first dorsal interosseous, abductor digiti minimi, and abductor pollicis brevis (APB) muscles were compared with those evoked by electrical stimulation at the wrist, brachial plexus, and cervical motor roots. The collision technique was also used to exclude volume conduction. The correlation between MRS-induced CMAP latency and body height was evaluated. Results In 32 of 36 normal subjects, supramaximal CMAPs were obtained in response to MRS. The size of CMAPs occurring in response to MRS was the same as the size of those occurring in response to high-voltage electrical cervical motor root stimulation. The collision technique revealed that the APB muscle was highly contaminated by volume conduction from adjacent muscles. CMAP latency correlated significantly with body height. Conclusions Supramaximal CMAPs can be obtained in most normal subjects. In subjects exhibiting confirmed supramaximal CMAPs in response to MRS, not only the latency of these CMAPs but also their amplitude and area can be clinically useful, excluding CMAPs in the APB muscle.

s / Brain Stimulation 8 (2015) 343e359 344 left dorsal stream targets the articulatory M1 through pSTS and SPT constituting essential posterior input regions and via parallel frontal pathways through pIFG and dPMC. The ventral stream mainly engages in semantic processing.

In the acute phase after stroke, active finger extension is a strong predictor of long-term dexterity. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) with surface electromyography of proximal arm and intrinsic hand muscles has proven to be of additional prognostic value to clinical assessment, especially in patients unable to follow instructions. The current study aimed to determine whether TMS of the extensor digitorum communis (EDC) further improves the prognostic accuracy. Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) of the EDC at rest and Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) of the upper extremity were measured in 18 participants within 4 weeks after stroke, and included as independent variables in a multiple linear regression analysis with the FMA at 26 weeks after stroke as dependent variable. The data demonstrated that the EDC resting MEPs had no additional value over clinical predictors, but a large MEP amplitude increased the likelihood of a high FMA score at 26 weeks. An absent EDC resting MEP did not preclude return of dexterity.