Effects of Motor Cortical Stimulation during Planar Reaching Movement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12970/2308-8354.2013.01.01.5Keywords:
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, attention deficit and hyperactive disorder, EEG-based brain-computer interface, epilepsy, neurorehabilitation, spinal cord, stroke.Abstract
Background: The purpose was to examine the effects of single pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over primary motor cortex delivered at different times during a center-out reaching task in a robot reaching environment. Methods: Eleven right-handed subjects participated. Movement hotspots and thresholds were determined for each subject, and the stimulation intensity was set at 120% of the movement threshold. TMS was delivered at rest and when subjects performed a series of reaching tasks. The 5 different conditions were: no stimulation, sham stimulation, and stimulation at 150, 500, or 1000 ms post go cue. Outcome measures included TMS-evoked movement during rest and in the 150ms condition, trajectory deviations (no stimulation, sham, and 150ms conditions), and peak velocity (PV), path length, reaction time, acceleration time, and deceleration time for all conditions. Results: When TMS was applied at 150 ms, the evoked path lengths were significantly shorter than at rest and had less deviation than the no-stimulation condition (p < 0.05). Peak velocities were lowest during the no-stimulation condition and highest during the 500ms condition (p < 0.05). Path lengths were significantly shorter during the no-stimulation, sham, and 150ms condition compared to the 500ms and 1000ms conditions. Conclusions: TMS applied during the reaction time phase suppressed movements evoked by TMS, decreased trajectory deviations, and shortened path length, while TMS delivered after movement onset increased PV and path length. TMS stimulation may be delivered to enhance movement parameters and potentially facilitate reach training in the robotic rehabilitation environment. Keywords: Kinematics, Robotics, TMS, Reaching, Rehabilitation.References
[1] Vesia M, Prime SL, Yan XG, Sergio LE, Crawford JD. Specificity of Human Parietal Saccade and Reach Regions during Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. J Neurosci 2010; 30(39): 13053-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1644-10.2010
[2] Fujiyama H, Tandonnet C, Summers JJ. Age-related differences in corticospinal excitability during a Go/NoGo task. Psychophysiology 2011; 48(10): 1448-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01201.x
[3] Verstynen T, Konkle T, Ivry RB. Two types of TMS-induced movement variability after stimulation of the primary motor cortex. J Neurophysiol 2006; 96(3): 1018-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.01358.2005
[4] Sjostrom PJ, Turrigiano GG, Nelson SB. Rate, timing, and cooperativity jointly determine cortical synaptic plasticity. Neuron 2001; 32(6): 1149-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00542-6
[5] Gregori B, Curra A, Dinapoli L, Bologna M, Accornero N, Berardelli A. The timing and intensity of transcranial magnetic stimulation, and the scalp site stimulated, as variables influencing motor sequence performance in healthy subjects. Exp Brain Res 2005; 166(1): 43-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00221-005-2337-3
[6] Berardelli A, Inghilleri M, Polidori L, Priori A, Mercuri B, Manfredi M. Effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation on single and sequential arm movements. Exp Brain Res 1994; 98(3): 501-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00233987
[7] Burle B, Bonnet M, Vidal F, Possamai CA, Hasbroucq T. A transcranial magnetic stimulation study of information processing in the motor cortex: Relationship between the silent period and the reaction time delay. Psychophysiology 2002; 39(2): 207-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1469-8986.3920207
[8] Day BL, Rothwell JC, Thompson PD, Denoordhout AM, Nakashima K, Shannon K, et al. Delay in the execution of voluntary movement by electrical or magnetic brainstimulation in intact man - evidence for the storage of motor programs in the brain. Brain 1989; 112: 649-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/brain/112.3.649
[9] Pascualleone A, Brasilneto JP, Vallssole J, Cohen LG, Hallett M. Simple reaction-time to focal transcranial magnetic stimulation - comparison with reaction-time to acoustic, visual and somatosensory stimuli. Brain 1992; 115: 109-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/brain/115.1.109
[10] Latash ML, Danion F, Bonnard M. Effects of transcranial magnetic stimulation on muscle activation patterns and joint kinematics within a two-joint motor synergy. Brain Res 2003; 961(2): 229-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0006-8993(02)03958-6
[11] Jones-Lush LM, Judkins TN, Wittenberg GF. Arm movement maps evoked by cortical magnetic stimulation in a robotic environment. Neuroscience [Article] 2010; 165(3): 774-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2009.10.065
[12] Classen J, Liepert J, Wise SP, Hallett M, Cohen LG. Rapid plasticity of human cortical movement representation induced by practice. J Neurophysiol 1998; 79(2): 1117-23.
[13] Lewis GN, Vandal AC, McNair PJ. A Method to Monitor Upper Limb Movement Direction Encoding in the Corticomotor Pathway. J Motor Behavior 2012; 44(4): 223- 32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222895.2012.684081
[14] Krutky MA, Perreault EJ. Motor cortical measures of usedependent plasticity are graded from distal to proximal in the human upper limb. J Neurophysiol 2007; 98(6): 3230-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00750.2007
[15] van Elswijk G, Schot WD, Stegeman DF, Overeem S. Changes in corticospinal excitability and the direction of evoked movements during motor preparation: a TMS study. BMC Neurosci 2008; 9.
[16] Sommer M, Classen J, Cohen LG, Hallett M. Time course of determination of movement direction in the reaction time task in humans. J Neurophysiol 2001; 86(3): 1195-201.
[17] Soto O, Valls-Sole J, Kumru H. Paired-Pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation During Preparation for Simple and Choice Reaction Time Tasks. J Neurophysiol [Article] 2010; 104(3): 1392-400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00620.2009
[18] Elliott D, Hansen S, Grierson LEM, Lyons J, Bennett SJ, Hayes SJ. Goal-Directed Aiming: Two Components but Multiple Processes. Psychol Bull 2010; 136(6): 1023-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0020958
[19] Aisen ML, Krebs HI, Hogan N, McDowell F, Volpe BT. The effect of robot-assisted therapy and rehabilitative training on motor recovery following stroke. Archiv Neurol 1997; 54(4): 443-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1997.00550160075019
[20] Finley MA, Fasoli SE, Dipietro L, Ohlhoff J, MacClellan L, Meister C, et al. Short-duration robotic therapy in stroke patients with severe upper-limb motor impairment. J Rehabilit Res Dev 2005; 42(5): 683-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2004.12.0153
[21] Lo AC, Guarino PD, Richards LG, Haselkorn JK, Wittenberg GF, Federman DG, et al. Robot-Assisted Therapy for LongTerm Upper-Limb Impairment after Stroke. New Engl J Med 2010; 362(19): 1772-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0911341
[22] Conroy SS, Whitall J, Dipietro L, Jones-Lush LM, Zhan M, Finley MA, et al. Effect of Gravity on Robot-Assisted Motor Training After Chronic Stroke: A Randomized Trial. Archiv Phys Med Rehabilit 2011; 92(11): 1754-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2011.06.016
