Healthy
Conditions
Keywords
transcranial direct current stimulation, motor performance
Brief summary
to investigate the effect of stimulation intensity on motor performance in healthy adults.
Detailed description
60 healthy subjects were randomly allocated to one of three groups: (a) 20-min of High-Definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) with an intensity of 2 mA (HD-tDCS 2 mA); (2) 20-min of HD-tDCS with an intensity of 1.5 mA (HD-tDCS 1.5 mA); and (3) 20-min of sham HD-tDCS (HD-tDCS sham). The stimulation was administered noninvasively using an M x N 9-channel high definition transcranial electrical current stimulator from Soterix Medical (New York, NY). The anodal stimulation targeted the right Brodmann area 4 (primary motor cortex) based on HD-Targets brain modelling software (Soterix Medical, New York, NY). Tests: The non-dominant left arm was tested. The subjects performed a sequential point-to-point movement task on the graphics tablet. Initially, the participants were required to perform 3 sequences without errors to familiarize themselves with the setup, the task and the sequence. Then, they performed the pre-test which consisted of two blocks of 6 sequences, i.e. 12 sequences, with a 30 s break between blocks. Two min after starting the appropriate stimulation, they performed 2 blocks of 6 sequences (identical to the pre-test). After finishing the tDCS stimulation, the participants performed a post-test, which was also identical to the pre-test. The participants returned after 24 hours to perform a retention test, which was equivalent to the pre- and post-tests. Two outcome measures were used: movement time (s) and the reaction time (s) of the reaching movements.
Interventions
DEVICEHD-tDCS 2 mA
anodal high definition transcranial direct current stimulation of the right primary motor cortex with an intensity of 2 mA
DEVICEHD-tDCS 1.5 mA
anodal high definition transcranial direct current stimulation of the right primary motor cortex with an intensity of 1.5 mA
DEVICEHD-tDCS sham
sham stimulation of the right primary motor cortex
Sponsors
Tel Aviv University
Ariel University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Intervention model description
randomized controlled trial (RCT)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 35 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* aged between 20 and 35 * right-hand dominant * healthy according to self report
Exclusion criteria
* taking psychiatric medications * a history of drug abuse or dependence * psychiatric or neurological disorder * a history of seizures * metal implants in their head * musculoskeletal deficits interfering with task performance (proper reaching performance in sitting)
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in movement time (s) from baseline to intervention | Baseline (immediately before stimulation), two minutes after starting the stimulation | Time from movement onset (first time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity) until the end of the movement (the last time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity). Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter movement time. |
| Change in movement time (s) from baseline to posttest | Baseline (immediately before stimulation), immediately post stimulation | Time from movement onset (first time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity) until the end of the movement (the last time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity). Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter movement time. |
| Change in movement time (s) from baseline to retention test | Baseline (immediately before stimulation), 24 hours following the stimulation | Time from movement onset (first time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity) until the end of the movement (the last time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity). Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter movement time. |
| Change in movement time (s) from intervention to posttest | Two minutes after starting the stimulation, immediately post stimulation | Time from movement onset (first time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity) until the end of the movement (the last time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity). Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter movement time. |
| Change in movement time (s) from intervention to retention test | Two minutes after starting the stimulation, 24 hours following the stimulation | Time from movement onset (first time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity) until the end of the movement (the last time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity). Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter movement time. |
| Change in movement time (s) from posttest to retention test | immediately post stimulation, 24 hours following the stimulation | Time from movement onset (first time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity) until the end of the movement (the last time the tangential velocity was greater than 5% of the peak tangential velocity). Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter movement time. |
| Change in reaction time (s) from baseline to intervention | Baseline (immediately before stimulation), two minutes after starting the stimulation | Time between when the target appeared in green (changed color from white to green), and movement onset. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter reaction time. |
| Change in reaction time (s) from baseline to posttest | Baseline (immediately before stimulation), immediately post stimulation | Time between when the target appeared in green (changed color from white to green), and movement onset. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter reaction time. |
| Change in reaction time (s) from baseline to retention test | Baseline (immediately before stimulation), 24 hours following the stimulation | Time between when the target appeared in green (changed color from white to green), and movement onset. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter reaction time. |
| Change in reaction time (s) from intervention to posttest | Two minutes after starting the stimulation, immediately post stimulation | Time between when the target appeared in green (changed color from white to green), and movement onset. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter reaction time. |
| Change in reaction time (s) from intervention to retention test | Two minutes after starting the stimulation, 24 hours following the stimulation | Time between when the target appeared in green (changed color from white to green), and movement onset. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter reaction time. |
| Change in reaction time (s) from posttest to retention test | immediately post stimulation, 24 hours following the stimulation | Time between when the target appeared in green (changed color from white to green), and movement onset. Improved motor performance was indicated by a shorter reaction time. |
Countries
Israel
Outcome results
None listed