Adam Z Gardi1, Amanda K Vogel1, Aastha K Dharia1, Chandramouli Krishnan1,2,3,4. 1. NeuRRo Lab, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 2. Michigan Robotics Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. School of Kinesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 4. Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a growing concern among the scientific community that the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are highly variable across studies. The use of different tDCS devices and electrode sizes may contribute to this variability; however, this issue has not been verified experimentally. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of tDCS device and electrode size on quadriceps motor cortical excitability. METHODS: The effect of tDCS device and electrode size on quadriceps motor cortical excitability was quantified across a range of TMS intensities using a novel evoked torque approach that has been previously shown to be highly reliable. In experiment 1, anodal tDCS-induced excitability changes were measured in twenty individuals using two devices (Empi and Soterix) on two separate days. In experiment 2, anodal tDCS-induced excitability changes were measured in thirty individuals divided into three groups based on the electrode size. A novel Bayesian approach was used in addition to the classical hypothesis testing during data analyses. RESULTS: There were no significant main or interaction effects, indicating that cortical excitability did not differ between different tDCS devices or electrode sizes. The lack of pre-post time effect in both experiments indicated that cortical excitability was minimally affected by anodal tDCS. Bayesian analyses indicated that the null model was more favored than the main or the interaction effects model. CONCLUSIONS: Motor cortical excitability was not altered by anodal tDCS and did not differ by devices or electrode sizes used in the study. Future studies should examine if behavioral outcomes are different based on tDCS device or electrode size.
BACKGROUND: There is a growing concern among the scientific community that the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are highly variable across studies. The use of different tDCS devices and electrode sizes may contribute to this variability; however, this issue has not been verified experimentally. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of tDCS device and electrode size on quadriceps motor cortical excitability. METHODS: The effect of tDCS device and electrode size on quadriceps motor cortical excitability was quantified across a range of TMS intensities using a novel evoked torque approach that has been previously shown to be highly reliable. In experiment 1, anodal tDCS-induced excitability changes were measured in twenty individuals using two devices (Empi and Soterix) on two separate days. In experiment 2, anodal tDCS-induced excitability changes were measured in thirty individuals divided into three groups based on the electrode size. A novel Bayesian approach was used in addition to the classical hypothesis testing during data analyses. RESULTS: There were no significant main or interaction effects, indicating that cortical excitability did not differ between different tDCS devices or electrode sizes. The lack of pre-post time effect in both experiments indicated that cortical excitability was minimally affected by anodal tDCS. Bayesian analyses indicated that the null model was more favored than the main or the interaction effects model. CONCLUSIONS: Motor cortical excitability was not altered by anodal tDCS and did not differ by devices or electrode sizes used in the study. Future studies should examine if behavioral outcomes are different based on tDCS device or electrode size.
Authors: Dylan J Edwards; Mar Cortes; Avrielle Rykman-Peltz; Johanna Chang; Jessica Elder; Gary Thickbroom; Juan J Mariman; Linda M Gerber; Clara Oromendia; Hermano I Krebs; Felipe Fregni; Bruce T Volpe; Alvaro Pascual-Leone Journal: Restor Neurol Neurosci Date: 2019 Impact factor: 2.406
Authors: Jidan Zhong; Julia C Nantes; Scott A Holmes; Serge Gallant; Sridar Narayanan; Lisa Koski Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2016-07-06 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Scott R Brown; Edward P Washabaugh; Aviroop Dutt-Mazumder; Edward M Wojtys; Riann M Palmieri-Smith; Chandramouli Krishnan Journal: Sports Health Date: 2020-12-18 Impact factor: 3.843