Literature DB >> 21170708

Non-invasive brain stimulation enhances fine motor control of the hemiparetic ankle: implications for rehabilitation.

Sangeetha Madhavan1, Kenneth A Weber, James W Stinear.   

Abstract

We set out to answer two questions with this study: 1. Can stroke patients improve voluntary control of their paretic ankle by practising a visuo-motor ankle-tracking task? 2. Are practice effects enhanced with non-invasive brain stimulation? A carefully selected sample of chronic stroke patients able to perform the experimental task attended three data collection sessions. Facilitatory transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was applied in a random order over the lower limb primary motor cortex of the lesioned hemisphere or the non-lesioned hemisphere or sham stimulation was delivered over the lesioned hemisphere. In each session, tDCS was applied as patients practiced tracking a sinusoidal waveform for 15 min using dorsiflexion-plantarflexion movements of their paretic ankle. The difference in tracking error prior to, and after, the 15 min of practice was calculated. A practice effect was revealed following sham stimulation, and this effect was enhanced with tDCS applied over the lesioned hemisphere. The practice effect observed following sham stimulation was eliminated by tDCS applied over the non-lesioned hemisphere. The study provides the first evidence that non-invasive brain stimulation applied to the lesioned motor cortex of moderate- to well-recovered stroke patients enhances voluntary control of the paretic ankle. The results provide a basis for examining whether this enhanced ankle control can be induced in patients with greater impairments and whether enhanced control of a single or multiple lower limb joints improves hemiparetic gait patterns.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21170708     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-010-2511-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  24 in total

1.  fMRI analysis of ankle movement tracking training in subject with stroke.

Authors:  James R Carey; Kathleen M Anderson; Teresa J Kimberley; Scott M Lewis; Edward J Auerbach; Kamil Ugurbil
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-10-25       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Neural substrates of motor memory consolidation depend on practice structure.

Authors:  Shailesh S Kantak; Katherine J Sullivan; Beth E Fisher; Barbara J Knowlton; Carolee J Winstein
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2010-07-11       Impact factor: 24.884

3.  A paradox: after stroke, the non-lesioned lower limb motor cortex may be maladaptive.

Authors:  Sangeetha Madhavan; Lynn M Rogers; James W Stinear
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2010-08-16       Impact factor: 3.386

4.  Transcranial direct current stimulation of the unaffected hemisphere in stroke patients.

Authors:  Felipe Fregni; Paulo S Boggio; Carlos G Mansur; Tim Wagner; Merari J L Ferreira; Moises C Lima; Sergio P Rigonatti; Marco A Marcolin; Steven D Freedman; Michael A Nitsche; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2005-09-28       Impact factor: 1.837

5.  Noninvasive cortical stimulation enhances motor skill acquisition over multiple days through an effect on consolidation.

Authors:  Janine Reis; Heidi M Schambra; Leonardo G Cohen; Ethan R Buch; Brita Fritsch; Eric Zarahn; Pablo A Celnik; John W Krakauer
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans.

Authors:  M A Nitsche; W Paulus
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2001-11-27       Impact factor: 9.910

7.  Effects of non-invasive cortical stimulation on skilled motor function in chronic stroke.

Authors:  Friedhelm Hummel; Pablo Celnik; Pascal Giraux; Agnes Floel; Wan-Hsun Wu; Christian Gerloff; Leonardo G Cohen
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2005-01-05       Impact factor: 13.501

8.  Reliability of TMS motor evoked potentials in quadriceps of subjects with chronic hemiparesis after stroke.

Authors:  Lewis A Wheaton; Federico Villagra; Daniel F Hanley; Richard F Macko; Larry W Forrester
Journal:  J Neurol Sci       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 3.181

9.  Consensus: "Can tDCS and TMS enhance motor learning and memory formation?"

Authors:  Janine Reis; Edwin Robertson; John W Krakauer; John Rothwell; Lisa Marshall; Christian Gerloff; Eric Wassermann; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Friedhelm Hummel; Pablo A Celnik; Joseph Classen; Agnes Floel; Ulf Ziemann; Walter Paulus; Hartwig R Siebner; Jan Born; Leonardo G Cohen
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.955

Review 10.  Using non-invasive brain stimulation to augment motor training-induced plasticity.

Authors:  Nadia Bolognini; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Felipe Fregni
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 4.262

View more
  51 in total

1.  Excitability changes induced in the human auditory cortex by transcranial direct current stimulation: direct electrophysiological evidence.

Authors:  Tino Zaehle; Manuela Beretta; Lutz Jäncke; Christoph S Herrmann; Pascale Sandmann
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Effects of anodal tDCS of the lower limb M1 on ankle reaction time in young adults.

Authors:  Daya Devanathan; Sangeetha Madhavan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Timing-dependent priming effects of tDCS on ankle motor skill learning.

Authors:  Aishwarya Sriraman; Tatsuya Oishi; Sangeetha Madhavan
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 3.252

4.  Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to the supplementary motor area (SMA) influences performance on motor tasks.

Authors:  K E Hupfeld; C J Ketcham; H D Schneider
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Ipsilateral Motor Pathways and Transcallosal Inhibition During Lower Limb Movement After Stroke.

Authors:  Brice T Cleland; Sangeetha Madhavan
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 3.919

6.  Anodal tDCS of the lower limb M1 does not acutely affect clinical blood pressure and heart rate in healthy and post stroke individuals.

Authors:  Tai Tri Nguyen; John Ugwu; Sangeetha Madhavan
Journal:  SOJ Neurol       Date:  2015-12-01

Review 7.  Gait disorder rehabilitation using vision and non-vision based sensors: a systematic review.

Authors:  Asraf Ali; Kenneth Sundaraj; Badlishah Ahmad; Nizam Ahamed; Anamul Islam
Journal:  Bosn J Basic Med Sci       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.363

Review 8.  Noninvasive brain stimulation in traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Asli Demirtas-Tatlidede; Andrew M Vahabzadeh-Hagh; Montserrat Bernabeu; Jose M Tormos; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  J Head Trauma Rehabil       Date:  2012 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.710

9.  The use of magnetic resonance spectroscopy as a tool for the measurement of bi-hemispheric transcranial electric stimulation effects on primary motor cortex metabolism.

Authors:  Sara Tremblay; Vincent Beaulé; Sébastien Proulx; Louis-Philippe Lafleur; Julien Doyon; Małgorzata Marjańska; Hugo Théoret
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 1.355

10.  Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on postural stability and lower extremity strength in hemiplegic stroke patients.

Authors:  Min Kyun Sohn; Sung Ju Jee; Yeong Wook Kim
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2013-12-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.