Raf L J Meesen1, Herbert Thijs2, Daphnie J F Leenus3, Koen Cuypers1. 1. BIOMED, Biomedical Research Institute, Hasselt University, Agoralaan, Diepenbeek, Belgium REVAL Research Institute, Hasselt University, Agoralaan, Diepenbeek, Belgium Motor Control Laboratory, Research Center for Movement Control and Neuroplasticity, Research Center for Movement Control and Neuroplasticity, Group Biomedical Sciences, K.U. Leuven, Tervuursevest, Heverlee, Belgium. 2. I-BioStat, Interuniversity Institute for Biostatistics and Statistical Bioinformatics, Hasselt University, Agoralaan, Diepenbeek, Belgium and Leuven University, Leuven, Belgium. 3. BIOMED, Biomedical Research Institute, Hasselt University, Agoralaan, Diepenbeek, Belgium REVAL Research Institute, Hasselt University, Agoralaan, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the effects of atDCS on motor performance in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Previously, anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (atDCS) has been shown to improve motor performance in healthy subjects and neurodegenerative populations. However, the effect of atDCS on motor performance is not examined in MS. METHODS: In the current study, a sham controlled double-blind crossover design was used to evaluate the effect of 20 minutes of 1 mA atDCS or sham tDCS (stDCS) on a unimanual motor sequence-training task, consisting of sequential finger presses on a computer keyboard with the most impaired hand. Patients received stimulation (atDCS or stDCS) during motor training. tDCS was applied over the primary motor cortex contralateral to the most impaired hand. Motor performance was assessed immediately before, during and 30 minutes after stimulation. RESULTS: Although we need to be careful with the interpretation of the data due to lack of power, our results showed no significant effect of atDCS on motor performance. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that atDCS-supported motor training was not able to improve motor performance more than sham-supported motor training. Possibly, the effects of atDCS are mediated by specific MS-related characteristics. Furthermore, increasing atDCS intensity and offering multiple stimulation sessions might be necessary to optimize motor performance resulting from atDCS-supported motor training.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To assess the effects of atDCS on motor performance in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Previously, anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (atDCS) has been shown to improve motor performance in healthy subjects and neurodegenerative populations. However, the effect of atDCS on motor performance is not examined in MS. METHODS: In the current study, a sham controlled double-blind crossover design was used to evaluate the effect of 20 minutes of 1 mA atDCS or sham tDCS (stDCS) on a unimanual motor sequence-training task, consisting of sequential finger presses on a computer keyboard with the most impaired hand. Patients received stimulation (atDCS or stDCS) during motor training. tDCS was applied over the primary motor cortex contralateral to the most impaired hand. Motor performance was assessed immediately before, during and 30 minutes after stimulation. RESULTS: Although we need to be careful with the interpretation of the data due to lack of power, our results showed no significant effect of atDCS on motor performance. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that atDCS-supported motor training was not able to improve motor performance more than sham-supported motor training. Possibly, the effects of atDCS are mediated by specific MS-related characteristics. Furthermore, increasing atDCS intensity and offering multiple stimulation sessions might be necessary to optimize motor performance resulting from atDCS-supported motor training.
Entities:
Keywords:
Multiple sclerosis; motor training; neural rehabilitation; tDCS; transcranial direct current stimulation
Authors: A J Woods; A Antal; M Bikson; P S Boggio; A R Brunoni; P Celnik; L G Cohen; F Fregni; C S Herrmann; E S Kappenman; H Knotkova; D Liebetanz; C Miniussi; P C Miranda; W Paulus; A Priori; D Reato; C Stagg; N Wenderoth; M A Nitsche Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2015-11-22 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Jost-Julian Rumpf; Sophie Dietrich; Muriel Stoppe; Christopher Fricke; David Weise; Florian Then Bergh; Joseph Classen Journal: J Neurol Date: 2018-08-06 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Leigh E Charvet; Margaret Kasschau; Abhishek Datta; Helena Knotkova; Michael C Stevens; Angelo Alonzo; Colleen Loo; Kevin R Krull; Marom Bikson Journal: Front Syst Neurosci Date: 2015-03-17
Authors: Ana Sánchez-Kuhn; Cristian Pérez-Fernández; Rosa Cánovas; Pilar Flores; Fernando Sánchez-Santed Journal: Biomed Eng Online Date: 2017-08-18 Impact factor: 2.819