Literature DB >> 27157059

Remote Effects of Non-Invasive Cerebellar Stimulation on Error Processing in Motor Re-Learning.

Marco Taubert1, Thorsten Stein2, Tommy Kreutzberg3, Christian Stockinger2, Lukas Hecker3, Anne Focke2, Patrick Ragert4, Arno Villringer5, Burkhard Pleger6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While concurrent transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) affects motor memory acquisition and long-term retention, it is unclear how behavioral interference modulates long-term tDCS effects. Behavioral interference can be introduced through a secondary task learned in-between motor memory acquisition and later recall of the original task. OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS: The cerebellum is important for the processing of errors if movements should be adapted to external perturbations (motor memory acquisition). We hypothesized that concurrent cerebellar tDCS during adaptation influences both memory acquisition and re-acquisition if motor errors are enlarged due to behavioral interference.
METHODS: In a sham-controlled and double-blinded study, we applied anodal and cathodal tDCS to the ipsilateral cerebellum while subjects adapted reaching movements to an external, clockwise force field perturbation (acquisition task A) with their dominant right arm. Behavioral interference by an oppositely oriented, counter-clockwise perturbation (secondary task B) was introduced in between the acquisition and re-acquisition (24 h later) sessions.
RESULTS: Learning task B disrupted memory retention of A and re-increased motor errors in the re-acquisition session. Anodal but not sham or cathodal tDCS impaired motor memory acquisition and, additionally, increased motor errors during re-acquisition of the original motor memory. CONCLUSION(S): Behavioral interference disrupted motor memory retention but tDCS delivered online during memory acquisition induced lasting and robust effects on re-acquisition performance one day later. Our data also suggest different error-processing mechanisms at work during motor memory acquisition and re-acquisition.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anodal; Cathodal; Cerebellum; Force field adaptation; Interference; Transcranial direct current stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27157059     DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2016.04.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Stimul        ISSN: 1876-4754            Impact factor:   8.955


  9 in total

1.  Random Practice Enhances Retention and Spatial Transfer in Force Field Adaptation.

Authors:  Michael Herzog; Anne Focke; Philipp Maurus; Benjamin Thürer; Thorsten Stein
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 3.473

Review 2.  Modulating Motor Learning through Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation: An Integrative View.

Authors:  Claudia Ammann; Danny Spampinato; Javier Márquez-Ruiz
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-12-23

Review 3.  Targeting the Human Cerebellum with Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Modulate Behavior: a Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Viola Oldrati; Dennis J L G Schutter
Journal:  Cerebellum       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 3.847

4.  Altered Resting-State Functional Connectivity in Wernicke's Encephalopathy With Vestibular Impairment.

Authors:  Sun-Young Oh; Juhyung Lee; Jin-Ju Kang; Yeong-Hun Park; Ko Woon Kim; Jong-Min Lee; Ji-Soo Kim; Marianne Dieterich
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 4.003

5.  The Effect of Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Motor Learning: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Nitika Kumari; Denise Taylor; Nada Signal
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2019-10-04       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  The Impact of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Upper-Limb Motor Performance in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Ronak Patel; James Ashcroft; Ashish Patel; Hutan Ashrafian; Adam J Woods; Harsimrat Singh; Ara Darzi; Daniel Richard Leff
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 4.677

7.  Non-invasive Prefrontal/Frontal Brain Stimulation Is Not Effective in Modulating Food Reappraisal Abilities or Calorie Consumption in Obese Females.

Authors:  Felicitas Grundeis; Cristin Brand; Saurabh Kumar; Michael Rullmann; Jan Mehnert; Burkhard Pleger
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 4.677

8.  Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation for learning a novel split-belt treadmill task: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Nitika Kumari; Denise Taylor; Usman Rashid; Alain C Vandal; Paul F Smith; Nada Signal
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improves Maximum Isometric Force Production during Isometric Barbell Squats.

Authors:  Rouven Kenville; Tom Maudrich; Dennis Maudrich; Arno Villringer; Patrick Ragert
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2020-04-14
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.