To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).
Journal articles on the topic 'Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Saleem, Yusra, Komal ., and Stephen Riaz. "Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (TDCS)." International Journal of Endorsing Health Science Research (IJEHSR) 10, no. 4 (November 25, 2022): 441–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.29052/ijehsr.v10.i4.2022.441-445.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) is a neuromodulatory device that is used for its ability to enhance cognitive and behavioral performance. Human studies suggest that TDCS modulates cortical excitability during stimulation by nonsynaptic changes of the cells, along with evidence that the after-effects of TDCS are driven by synaptic modification. TDCS represents a potential intervention to enhance cognition across clinical populations, including mild cognitive impairment among psychological and neurological disorders. Studies suggest that TDCS might be helpful in treating depression with appropriate current, size of electrodes, and employment of montages. TDCS opens a new perspective in treating major depressive disorder (MDD) because of its ability to modulate cortical excitability and induce long-lasting effects.
2
Kornreich, C., P. Cole, and H. Kajosch. "Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) : psychiatric use." Revue Medicale de Bruxelles 39, no. 1 (2018): 47–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.30637/2018.17-106.
Full text
3
Kittaka, Chiharu, Toshiyuki Moriyama, Hideaki Itoh, and Satoru Saeki. "Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation/Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation（tACS/tDCS）." Japanese Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 59, no. 5 (May 18, 2022): 456–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.2490/jjrmc.59.456.
Full text
4
Herrera-Melendez, Ana-Lucia, Malek Bajbouj, and Sabine Aust. "Application of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Psychiatry." Neuropsychobiology 79, no. 6 (July 24, 2019): 372–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000501227.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulation technique, which noninvasively alters cortical excitability via weak polarizing currents between two electrodes placed on the scalp. Since it is comparably easy to handle, cheap to use and relatively well tolerated, tDCS has gained increasing interest in recent years. Based on well-known behavioral effects, a number of clinical studies have been performed in populations including patients with major depressive disorder followed by schizophrenia and substance use disorders, in sum with heterogeneous results with respect to efficacy. Nevertheless, the potential of tDCS must not be underestimated since it could be further improved by systematically investigating the various stimulation parameters to eventually increase clinical efficacy. The present article briefly explains the underlying physiology of tDCS, summarizes typical stimulation protocols and then reviews clinical efficacy for various psychiatric disorders as well as prevalent adverse effects. Future developments include combined and more complex interactions of tDCS with pharmacological or psychotherapeutic interventions. In particular, using computational models to individualize stimulation protocols, considering state dependency and applying closed-loop technologies will pave the way for tDCS-based personalized interventions as well as the development of home treatment settings promoting the role of tDCS as an effective treatment option for patients with mental health problems.
5
Sehm, Bernhard, Alexander Schäfer, Judy Kipping, Daniel Margulies, Virginia Conde, Marco Taubert, Arno Villringer, and Patrick Ragert. "Dynamic modulation of intrinsic functional connectivity by transcranial direct current stimulation." Journal of Neurophysiology 108, no. 12 (December 15, 2012): 3253–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00606.2012.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique capable of modulating cortical excitability and thereby influencing behavior and learning. Recent evidence suggests that bilateral tDCS over both primary sensorimotor cortices (SM1) yields more prominent effects on motor performance in both healthy subjects and chronic stroke patients than unilateral tDCS over SM1. To better characterize the underlying neural mechanisms of this effect, we aimed to explore changes in resting-state functional connectivity during both stimulation types. In a randomized single-blind crossover design, 12 healthy subjects underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging at rest before, during, and after 20 min of unilateral, bilateral, and sham tDCS stimulation over SM1. Eigenvector centrality mapping (ECM) was used to investigate tDCS-induced changes in functional connectivity patterns across the whole brain. Uni- and bilateral tDCS over SM1 resulted in functional connectivity changes in widespread brain areas compared with sham stimulation both during and after stimulation. Whereas bilateral tDCS predominantly modulated changes in primary and secondary motor as well as prefrontal regions, unilateral tDCS affected prefrontal, parietal, and cerebellar areas. No direct effect was seen under the stimulating electrode in the unilateral condition. The time course of changes in functional connectivity in the respective brain areas was nonlinear and temporally dispersed. These findings provide evidence toward a network-based understanding regarding the underpinnings of specific tDCS interventions.
6
Azarpaikan, Atefeh, Hamid Reza Taherii Torbati, Mehdi Sohrabi, Reza Boostani, and Majid Ghoshoni. "Timing-Dependent Priming Effects of Anodal tDCS on Two-Hand Coordination." Journal of Psychophysiology 34, no. 4 (October 1, 2020): 224–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803/a000250.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract. The aim of study was to investigate the interaction of time of applying anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with motor learning using a two-hand coordination (THC) task. Sixty-four healthy participants were tested under four stimulation conditions: anodal tDCS a head of the motor task, anodal tDCS during the motor task, anodal tDCS following the motor task, and sham tDCS. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) stimulation was applied on cerebellum by using a weak direct current (15 min) of 1.5 mA generated by a battery and regulated by the drive stimulator. The results show that on-line learning increased in the anodal tDCS-during group ( p = .039). The anodal tDCS-after group relied more on off-line learning ( p = .05). The during-tDCS and after-tDCS groups achieved greater improvements in speed/accuracy than the before-tDCS and sham-tDCS groups. The cerebellar tDCS may play a significant role to speed up motor skill acquisition and improve motor skill accuracy.
7
Hordacre, Brenton, Alana B. McCambridge, Michael C. Ridding, and Lynley V. Bradnam. "Can Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Enhance Poststroke Motor Recovery?" Neurology 97, no. 4 (May 13, 2021): 170–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000012187.
Full textAbstract:
New treatments that can facilitate neural repair and reduce persistent impairments have significant value in promoting recovery following stroke. One technique that has gained interest is transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as early research suggested it could enhance plasticity and enable greater behavioral recovery. However, several studies have now identified substantial intersubject variability in response to tDCS and clinical trials revealed insufficient evidence of treatment effectiveness. A possible explanation for the varied and negative findings is that the physiologic model of stroke recovery that researchers have used to guide the application of tDCS-based treatments in stroke is overly simplistic and does not account for stroke heterogeneity or known determinants that affect the tDCS response. Here, we propose that tDCS could have a more clearly beneficial role in enhancing stroke recovery if greater consideration is given to individualizing treatment. By critically reviewing the proposed mechanisms of tDCS, stroke physiology across the recovery continuum, and known determinants of tDCS response, we propose a new, theoretical, patient-tailored approach to delivering tDCS after stroke. The proposed model includes a step-by-step principled selection strategy for identifying optimal neuromodulation targets and outlines key areas for further investigation. Tailoring tDCS treatment to individual neuroanatomy and physiology is likely our best chance at producing robust and meaningful clinical benefit for people with stroke and would therefore accelerate opportunities for clinical translation.
8
Lee, Young-Ji, Bong-Jo Kim, Cheol-Soon Lee, Boseok Cha, So-Jin Lee, Jae-Won Choi, Eunji Lim, Nuree Kang, and Dongyun Lee. "Application of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Sleep Disturbances." Chronobiology in Medicine 4, no. 4 (December 31, 2022): 141–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.33069/cim.2022.0030.
Full textAbstract:
Sleep disturbances are common across all age groups, and they encompass a broad range of impairments of daytime functioning and comorbid various clinical conditions. However, current treatment methods for sleep disturbances have several limitations. As the ‘top-down’ pathway is known to play an important role in sleep-wake regulation, and as neuronal activity abnormalities have been reported as a potential pathological mechanism of sleep disturbances, the use of non-invasive brain stimulation—such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in treating sleep disturbances—has emerged. In the present review, we first explain the mechanism of tDCS, and we also introduce recent studies that have applied tDCS to sleep disorders, along with other sleep-related tDCS studies. In conclusion, many studies have achieved improvements in sleep state, although some of these studies have reported inconsistent effects of tDCS according to the protocol and the conditions used. Further studies are needed to explore the optimal protocols to use when applying tDCS in each sleep disturbance and to enhance the evidence on the clinical efficacy of tDCS.
9
Yamaguchi, Takuya, Takeshi Satow, Taro Komuro, and Tatsuya Mima. "Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improves Pusher Phenomenon." Case Reports in Neurology 11, no. 1 (February 28, 2019): 61–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000497284.
Full textAbstract:
An 83-year-old man suffered from cerebral infarction of the right middle cerebral artery territory. In association with severe left hemiparesis and hemispatial neglect on the left side, he showed severe pusher phenomenon (PP), which made rehabilitation difficult. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was applied to the parietal area (2 mA × 20 min/day; anode on the right and cathode on the left) for 8 days, which resulted in remarkable improvement of PP and caused prolongation of static sitting time. tDCS of the parietal area could be a novel treatment option of PP following stroke.
10
Monti, A., R. Ferrucci, M. Fumagalli, F. Mameli, F. Cogiamanian, G. Ardolino, and A. Priori. "Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and language." Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry 84, no. 8 (November 8, 2012): 832–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2012-302825.
Full text
11
Ardolino, G., E. Scelzo, F. Cogiamanian, P. Bonara, A. Nozza, M. Rosa, S. Garlaschi, S. Barbieri, and A. Priori. "Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) and Lymphocytes." Brain Stimulation 7, no. 2 (March 2014): 332–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2013.11.007.
Full text
12
Charvet, Leigh, Margaret Kasschau, Marom Bikson, Abhishek Datta, Helena Knotkova, Michael C. Stevens, Angelo Alonzo, Colleen Loo, Kevin Krull, and Lamia Haider. "Remotely-Supervised Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)." Brain Stimulation 10, no. 1 (January 2017): e16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2016.11.070.
Full text
13
Giordano, James, Marom Bikson, Emily S. Kappenman, Vincent P. Clark, H. Branch Coslett, Michael R. Hamblin, Roy Hamilton, et al. "Mechanisms and Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation." Dose-Response 15, no. 1 (February 9, 2017): 155932581668546. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1559325816685467.
Full textAbstract:
The US Air Force Office of Scientific Research convened a meeting of researchers in the fields of neuroscience, psychology, engineering, and medicine to discuss most pressing issues facing ongoing research in the field of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and related techniques. In this study, we present opinions prepared by participants of the meeting, focusing on the most promising areas of research, immediate and future goals for the field, and the potential for hormesis theory to inform tDCS research. Scientific, medical, and ethical considerations support the ongoing testing of tDCS in healthy and clinical populations, provided best protocols are used to maximize safety. Notwithstanding the need for ongoing research, promising applications include enhancing vigilance/attention in healthy volunteers, which can accelerate training and support learning. Commonly, tDCS is used as an adjunct to training/rehabilitation tasks with the goal of leftward shift in the learning/treatment effect curves. Although trials are encouraging, elucidating the basic mechanisms of tDCS will accelerate validation and adoption. To this end, biomarkers (eg, clinical neuroimaging and findings from animal models) can support hypotheses linking neurobiological mechanisms and behavioral effects. Dosage can be optimized using computational models of current flow and understanding dose–response. Both biomarkers and dosimetry should guide individualized interventions with the goal of reducing variability. Insights from other applied energy domains, including ionizing radiation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, and low-level laser (light) therapy, can be prudently leveraged.
14
Avila, Eric, Jos N. van der Geest, Sandra Kengne Kamga, M. Claire Verhage, Opher Donchin, and Maarten A. Frens. "Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Effects on Saccade Adaptation." Neural Plasticity 2015 (2015): 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/968970.
Full textAbstract:
Saccade adaptation is a cerebellar-mediated type of motor learning in which the oculomotor system is exposed to repetitive errors. Different types of saccade adaptations are thought to involve distinct underlying cerebellar mechanisms. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) induces changes in neuronal excitability in a polarity-specific manner and offers a modulatory, noninvasive, functional insight into the learning aspects of different brain regions. We aimed to modulate the cerebellar influence on saccade gains during adaptation using tDCS. Subjects performed an inward (n=10) or outward (n=10) saccade adaptation experiment (25% intrasaccadic target step) while receiving 1.5 mA of anodal cerebellar tDCS delivered by a small contact electrode. Compared to sham stimulation, tDCS increased learning of saccadic inward adaptation but did not affect learning of outward adaptation. This may imply that plasticity mechanisms in the cerebellum are different between inward and outward adaptation. TDCS could have influenced specific cerebellar areas that contribute to inward but not outward adaptation. We conclude that tDCS can be used as a neuromodulatory technique to alter cerebellar oculomotor output, arguably by engaging wider cerebellar areas and increasing the available resources for learning.
15
Lang, Nicolas, Michael A. Nitsche, Michele Dileone, Paolo Mazzone, Javier De Andrés-Arés, Luis Diaz-Jara, Walter Paulus, Vincenzo Di Lazzaro, and Antonio Oliviero. "Transcranial direct current stimulation effects on I-wave activity in humans." Journal of Neurophysiology 105, no. 6 (June 2011): 2802–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00617.2010.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the human cerebral cortex modulates cortical excitability noninvasively in a polarity-specific manner: anodal tDCS leads to lasting facilitation and cathodal tDCS to inhibition of motor cortex excitability. To further elucidate the underlying physiological mechanisms, we recorded corticospinal volleys evoked by single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation of the primary motor cortex before and after a 5-min period of anodal or cathodal tDCS in eight conscious patients who had electrodes implanted in the cervical epidural space for the control of pain. The effects of anodal tDCS were evaluated in six subjects and the effects of cathodal tDCS in five subjects. Three subjects were studied with both polarities. Anodal tDCS increased the excitability of cortical circuits generating I waves in the corticospinal system, including the earliest wave (I1 wave), whereas cathodal tDCS suppressed later I waves. The motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude changes immediately following tDCS periods were in agreement with the effects produced on intracortical circuitry. The results deliver additional evidence that tDCS changes the excitability of cortical neurons.
16
Jiang, Xiong, Sophia Dahmani, Margarita Bronshteyn, Fan Nils Yang, John Paul Ryan, R. Craig Gallagher, Srikanth R. Damera, et al. "Cingulate transcranial direct current stimulation in adults with HIV." PLOS ONE 17, no. 6 (June 3, 2022): e0269491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269491.
Full textAbstract:
Background Neuronal dysfunction plays an important role in the high prevalence of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) in people with HIV (PWH). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)—with its capability to improve neuronal function—may have the potential to serve as an alternative therapeutic approach for HAND. Brain imaging and neurobehavioral studies provide converging evidence that injury to the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is highly prevalent and contributes to HAND in PWH, suggesting that ACC may serve as a potential neuromodulation target for HAND. Here we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, partial crossover pilot study to test the safety, tolerability, and potential efficacy of anodal tDCS over cingulate cortex in adults with HIV, with a focus on the dorsal ACC (dACC). Methods Eleven PWH (47–69 years old, 2 females, 100% African Americans, disease duration 16–36 years) participated in the study, which had two phases, Phase 1 and Phase 2. During Phase 1, participants were randomized to receive ten sessions of sham (n = 4) or cingulate tDCS (n = 7) over the course of 2–3 weeks. Treatment assignments were unknown to the participants and the technicians. Neuropsychology and MRI data were collected from four additional study visits to assess treatment effects, including one baseline visit (BL, prior to treatment) and three follow-up visits (FU1, FU2, and FU3, approximately 1 week, 3 weeks, and 3 months after treatment, respectively). Treatment assignment was unblinded after FU3. Participants in the sham group repeated the study with open-label cingulate tDCS during Phase 2. Statistical analysis was limited to data from Phase 1. Results Compared to sham tDCS, cingulate tDCS led to a decrease in Perseverative Errors in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), but not Non-Perseverative Errors, as well as a decrease in the ratio score of Trail Making Test—Part B (TMT-B) to TMT—Part A (TMT-A). Seed-to-voxel analysis with resting state functional MRI data revealed an increase in functional connectivity between the bilateral dACC and a cluster in the right dorsal striatum after cingulate tDCS. There were no differences in self-reported discomfort ratings between sham and cingulate tDCS. Conclusions Cingulate tDCS is safe and well-tolerated in PWH, and may have the potential to improve cognitive performance and brain function. A future study with a larger sample is warranted.
17
Au, Jacky, Benjamin Katz, Martin Buschkuehl, Kimberly Bunarjo, Thea Senger, Chelsea Zabel, Susanne M. Jaeggi, and John Jonides. "Enhancing Working Memory Training with Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation." Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 28, no. 9 (September 2016): 1419–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00979.
Full textAbstract:
Working memory (WM) is a fundamental cognitive ability that supports complex thought but is limited in capacity. Thus, WM training interventions have become very popular as a means of potentially improving WM-related skills. Another promising intervention that has gained increasing traction in recent years is transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a noninvasive form of brain stimulation that can modulate cortical excitability and temporarily increase brain plasticity. As such, it has the potential to boost learning and enhance performance on cognitive tasks. This study assessed the efficacy of tDCS to supplement WM training. Sixty-two participants were randomized to receive either right prefrontal, left prefrontal, or sham stimulation with concurrent visuospatial WM training over the course of seven training sessions. Results showed that tDCS enhanced training performance, which was strikingly preserved several months after training completion. Furthermore, we observed stronger effects when tDCS was spaced over a weekend break relative to consecutive daily training, and we also demonstrated selective transfer in the right prefrontal group to nontrained tasks of visual and spatial WM. These findings shed light on how tDCS may be leveraged as a tool to enhance performance on WM-intensive learning tasks.
18
Dissanayaka, Thusharika D., Maryam Zoghi, Michael Farrell, Gary F. Egan, and Shapour Jaberzadeh. "Sham transcranial electrical stimulation and its effects on corticospinal excitability: a systematic review and meta-analysis." Reviews in the Neurosciences 29, no. 2 (February 23, 2018): 223–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/revneuro-2017-0026.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractSham stimulation is used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy of active stimulation and placebo effects. It should mimic the characteristics of active stimulation to achieve blinding integrity. The present study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature to identify the effects of sham transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) – including anodal and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS, c-tDCS), transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) and transcranial pulsed current stimulation (tPCS) – on corticospinal excitability (CSE), compared to baseline in healthy individuals. Electronic databases – PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Science Direct and MEDLINE (Ovid) – were searched for RCTs of tES from 1990 to March 2017. Thirty RCTs were identified. Using a random-effects model, meta-analysis of a-tDCS, c-tDCS, tACS, tRNS and tPCS studies showed statistically non-significant pre-post effects of sham interventions on CSE. This review found evidence for statically non-significant effects of sham tES on CSE.
19
Jahshan, Carol, Jonathan K. Wynn, Brian J. Roach, Daniel H. Mathalon, and Michael F. Green. "Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Visual Neuroplasticity in Schizophrenia." Clinical EEG and Neuroscience 51, no. 6 (May 28, 2020): 382–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1550059420925697.
Full textAbstract:
People with schizophrenia (SZ) exhibit visual processing abnormalities that affect their daily functioning and remediating these deficits might help to improve functioning. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a potential tool for perceptual enhancement for this purpose, though there are no reports of tDCS applied to visual cortex in SZ. In a within-subject, crossover design, we evaluated the effects of tDCS on visual processing in 27 SZ. All patients received anodal, cathodal, or sham stimulation over the central occipital region in 3 visits separated by 1 week. In each visit, a backward masking task and an electroencephalography measure of visual neuroplasticity were administered after tDCS. Neuroplasticity was assessed with visual evoked potentials before and after tetanizing visual high-frequency stimulation. Masking performance was significantly poorer in the anodal and cathodal conditions compared with sham. Both anodal and cathodal stimulation increased the amplitude of P1 but did not change the plasticity index. We found significant plasticity effects of tDCS for only one waveform for one stimulation condition (P2 for anodal tDCS) which did not survive correction for multiple comparisons. The reason for the lack of tDCS stimulation effects on plasticity may be because tDCS was not delivered simultaneously with the tetanizing visual stimulus. The present findings emphasize the need for more research on the relevant parameters for stimulation of visual processing regions in clinical populations.
20
Monte-Silva, Katia, Min-Fang Kuo, David Liebetanz, Walter Paulus, and Michael A. Nitsche. "Shaping the Optimal Repetition Interval for Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)." Journal of Neurophysiology 103, no. 4 (April 2010): 1735–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00924.2009.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial DC stimulation (tDCS) is a plasticity-inducing noninvasive brain stimulation tool with various potential therapeutic applications in neurological and psychiatric diseases. Currently, the duration of the aftereffects of stimulation is restricted. For future clinical applications, stimulation protocols are required that produce aftereffects lasting for days or weeks. Options to prolong the effects of tDCS are further prolongation or repetition of tDCS. Nothing is known thus far about optimal protocols in this behalf, although repetitive stimulation is already performed in clinical applications. Thus we explored the effects of different break durations on cathodal tDCS-induced cortical excitability alterations. In 12 subjects, two identical periods of cathodal tDCS (9-min duration; 1 mA) with an interstimulation interval of 0 (no break), 3, or 20 min or 3 or 24 h were performed. The results indicate that doubling stimulation duration without a break prolongs the aftereffects from 60 to 90 min after tDCS. When the second stimulation was performed during the aftereffects of the first, a prolongation and enhancement of tDCS-induced effects for ≤120 min after stimulation was observed. In contrast, when the second stimulation followed the first one after 3 or 24 h, the aftereffects were initially attenuated, or abolished, but afterwards re-established for up to 120 min after tDCS in the 24-h condition. These results suggest that, for prolonging the aftereffects of cathodal tDCS, stimulation interval might be important.
21
Leite, Jorge, Leon Morales-Quezada, Sandra Carvalho, Aurore Thibaut, Deniz Doruk, Chiun-Fan Chen, Steven C. Schachter, Alexander Rotenberg, and Felipe Fregni. "Surface EEG-Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Closed-Loop System." International Journal of Neural Systems 27, no. 06 (April 11, 2017): 1750026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0129065717500265.
Full textAbstract:
Conventional transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) protocols rely on applying electrical current at a fixed intensity and duration without using surrogate markers to direct the interventions. This has led to some mixed results; especially because tDCS induced effects may vary depending on the ongoing level of brain activity. Therefore, the objective of this preliminary study was to assess the feasibility of an EEG-triggered tDCS system based on EEG online analysis of its frequency bands. Six healthy volunteers were randomized to participate in a double-blind sham-controlled crossover design to receive a single session of 10[Formula: see text]min 2[Formula: see text]mA cathodal and sham tDCS. tDCS trigger controller was based upon an algorithm designed to detect an increase in the relative beta power of more than 200%, accompanied by a decrease of 50% or more in the relative alpha power, based on baseline EEG recordings. EEG-tDCS closed-loop-system was able to detect the predefined EEG magnitude deviation and successfully triggered the stimulation in all participants. This preliminary study represents a proof-of-concept for the development of an EEG-tDCS closed-loop system in humans. We discuss and review here different methods of closed loop system that can be considered and potential clinical applications of such system.
22
Shaw, Michael, Giuseppina Pilloni, and Leigh Charvet. "Delivering Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Away From Clinic: Remotely Supervised tDCS." Military Medicine 185, Supplement_1 (January 2020): 319–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usz348.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction To demonstrate the broad utility of the remotely supervised transcranial direct current stimulation (RS-tDCS) protocol developed to deliver at-home rehabilitation for individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS). Methods Stimulation delivered with the RS-tDCS protocol and paired with adaptive cognitive training was delivered to three different study groups of MS patients to determine the feasibility and tolerability of the protocol. The three studies each used consecutively increasing amounts of stimulation amperage (1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mA, respectively) and session numbers (10, 20, and 40 sessions, respectively). Results High feasibility and tolerability of the stimulation were observed for n = 99 participants across three tDCS pilot studies. Conclusions RS-tDCS is feasible and tolerable for MS participants. The RS-tDCS protocol can be used to reach those in locations without clinic access and be paired with training or rehabilitation in locations away from the clinic. This protocol could be used to deliver tDCS paired with training or rehabilitation activities remotely to service members and veterans.
23
Lum, Jarrad A. G., Gillian M. Clark, Caitlyn M. Rogers, James D. Skalkos, Ian Fuelscher, Christian Hyde, and Peter G. Enticott. "Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (atDCS) on Sentence Comprehension." Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 25, no. 3 (January 29, 2019): 331–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1355617718001121.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractObjectives: This study examined the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) on sentence and word comprehension in healthy adults. Methods: Healthy adult participants, aged between 19 and 30 years, received either a-tDCS over the left inferior frontal gyrus (n=18) or sham stimulation (n=18). Participants completed sentence comprehension and word comprehension tasks before and during stimulation. Accuracy and reaction times (RTs) were recorded as participants completed both tasks. Results: a-tDCS was found to significantly decrease RT on the sentence comprehension task compared to baseline. There was no change in RT following sham stimulation. a-tDCS was not found to have a significant effect on accuracy. Also, a-tDCS did not affect accuracy or RTs on the word comprehension task. Conclusions: The study provides evidence that non-invasive anodal electrical stimulation can modulate sentence comprehension in healthy adults, at least compared to their baseline performance. (JINS, 2019, 25, 331–335)
24
Bashir, Shahid, Shafiq Ahmad, Moath Alatefi, Ali Hamza, and Mohammad Sahreef. "Quantifying and visualizing the transcranial direct current stimulation research indicators." International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences 6, no. 12 (November 26, 2018): 4136. http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20184921.
Full textAbstract:
The field of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has experienced significant growth in the past 15 years which is mainly devoted to determining the basic and clinical potential of tDCS in humans. The aim of this study is to quantitatively analyze the current worldwide progress on tDCS research as well as to highlight researchers, journals, institutions and countries which are contributing significantly in the past 18 years. We conducted a quantitative analysis of research articles regarding tDCS published from 1998 to 2016 and indexed in the web of science core collection database. Data was downloaded in October, 2016. In the past 18 years, there were 2457 studies on tDCS indexed by web of science database, including all documents type such as article, review, meeting abstract, proceedings paper, letters, and etc. This study is focusing on the main articles and reviews; therefore, the research production was reduced to 2000 publications. The analysis showed that most of the studies in the field were published by North American and European institutions with a reasonable proportion of the publications were also by Japanese institutions from Asia. From the perspective of research progress, we found that the number of published papers on tDCS has increased significantly in the past 10 years, between them a remarkable positive correlation exists.
25
De Doncker, William, Sasha Ondobaka, and Annapoorna Kuppuswamy. "Effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on post-stroke fatigue." Journal of Neurology 268, no. 8 (February 17, 2021): 2831–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00415-021-10442-8.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background Fatigue is one of the most commonly reported symptoms post-stroke, which has a severe impact on the quality of life. Post-stroke fatigue is associated with reduced motor cortical excitability, specifically of the affected hemisphere. Objective The aim of this exploratory study was to assess whether fatigue symptoms can be reduced by increasing cortical excitability using anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Methods In this sham-controlled, double-blind intervention study, tDCS was applied bilaterally over the primary motor cortex in a single session in thirty stroke survivors with high severity of fatigue. A questionnaire-based measure of trait fatigue (primary outcome) was obtained before, after a week and 5 weeks post stimulation. Secondary outcome measures of state fatigue, motor cortex neurophysiology and perceived effort were also assessed pre, immediately post, a week and 5 weeks post stimulation. Results Anodal tDCS significantly improved fatigue symptoms a week after real stimulation when compared to sham stimulation. There was also a significant change in motor cortex neurophysiology of the affected hemisphere and perceived effort, a week after stimulation. The degree of improvement in fatigue was associated with baseline anxiety levels. Conclusion A single session of anodal tDCS improves fatigue symptoms with the effect lasting up to a week post stimulation. tDCS may therefore be a useful tool for managing fatigue symptoms post-stroke. Trial registration NCT04634864 Date of registration 17/11/2020–“retrospectively registered”.
26
Rudroff, Thorsten, Craig D. Workman, Alexandra C. Fietsam, and Laura L. Boles Ponto. "Imaging Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) with Positron Emission Tomography (PET)." Brain Sciences 10, no. 4 (April 15, 2020): 236. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10040236.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a form of non-invasive neuromodulation that is increasingly being utilized to examine and modify several cognitive and motor functions. Although tDCS holds great potential, it is difficult to determine optimal treatment procedures to accommodate configurations, the complex shapes, and dramatic conductivity differences among various tissues. Furthermore, recent demonstrations showed that up to 75% of the tDCS current applied to rodents and human cadavers was shunted by the scalp, subcutaneous tissue, and muscle, bringing the effects of tDCS on the cortex into question. Consequently, it is essential to combine tDCS with human neuroimaging to complement animal and cadaver studies and clarify if and how tDCS can affect neural function. One viable approach is positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. PET has unique potential for examining the effects of tDCS within the central nervous system in vivo, including cerebral metabolism, neuroreceptor occupancy, and neurotransmitter activity/binding. The focus of this review is the emerging role of PET and potential PET radiotracers for studying tDCS-induced functional changes in the human brain.
27
Battaglini, Luca, Federica Mena, and Clara Casco. "Improving motion detection via anodal transcranial direct current stimulation." Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience 38, no. 5 (November 13, 2020): 395–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/rnn-201050.
Full textAbstract:
Background: To study motion perception, a stimulus consisting of a field of small, moving dots is often used. Generally, some of the dots coherently move in the same direction (signal) while the rest move randomly (noise). A percept of global coherent motion (CM) results when many different local motion signals are combined. CM computation is a complex process that requires the integrity of the middle-temporal area (MT/V5) and there is evidence that increasing the number of dots presented in the stimulus makes such computation more efficient. Objective: In this study, we explored whether anodal direct current stimulation (tDCS) over MT/V5 would increase individual performance in a CM task at a low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR, i.e. low percentage of coherent dots) and with a target consisting of a large number of moving dots (high dot numerosity, e.g. >250 dots) with respect to low dot numerosity (<60 dots), indicating that tDCS favour the integration of local motion signal into a single global percept (global motion). Method: Participants were asked to perform a CM detection task (two-interval forced-choice, 2IFC) while they received anodal, cathodal, or sham stimulation on three different days. Results: Our findings showed no effect of cathodal tDCS with respect to the sham condition. Instead, anodal tDCS improves performance, but mostly when dot numerosity is high (>400 dots) to promote efficient global motion processing. Conclusions: The present study suggests that tDCS may be used under appropriate stimulus conditions (low SNR and high dot numerosity) to boost the global motion processing efficiency, and may be useful to empower clinical protocols to treat visual deficits.
28
Zhao, Chong, and Geoffrey F. Woodman. "Converging Evidence That Neural Plasticity Underlies Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation." Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 33, no. 1 (January 2021): 146–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01639.
Full textAbstract:
It is not definitely known how direct-current stimulation causes its long-lasting effects. Here, we tested the hypothesis that the long time course of transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) is because of the electrical field increasing the plasticity of the brain tissue. If this is the case, then we should see tDCS effects when humans need to encode information into long-term memory, but not at other times. We tested this hypothesis by delivering tDCS to the ventral visual stream of human participants during different tasks (i.e., recognition memory vs. visual search) and at different times during a memory task. We found that tDCS improved memory encoding, and the neural correlates thereof, but not retrieval. We also found that tDCS did not change the efficiency of information processing during visual search for a certain target object, a task that does not require the formation of new connections in the brain but instead relies on attention and object recognition mechanisms. Thus, our findings support the hypothesis that direct-current stimulation modulates brain activity by changing the underlying plasticity of the tissue.
29
Antal, Andrea, and Christoph S. Herrmann. "Transcranial Alternating Current and Random Noise Stimulation: Possible Mechanisms." Neural Plasticity 2016 (2016): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3616807.
Full textAbstract:
Background. Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is a relatively recent method suited to noninvasively modulate brain oscillations. Technically the method is similar but not identical to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). While decades of research in animals and humans has revealed the main physiological mechanisms of tDCS, less is known about the physiological mechanisms of tACS.Method. Here, we review recent interdisciplinary research that has furthered our understanding of how tACS affects brain oscillations and by what means transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) that is a special form of tACS can modulate cortical functions.Results. Animal experiments have demonstrated in what way neurons react to invasively and transcranially applied alternating currents. Such findings are further supported by neural network simulations and knowledge from physics on entraining physical oscillators in the human brain. As a result, fine-grained models of the human skull and brain allow the prediction of the exact pattern of current flow during tDCS and tACS. Finally, recent studies on human physiology and behavior complete the picture of noninvasive modulation of brain oscillations.Conclusion. In future, the methods may be applicable in therapy of neurological and psychiatric disorders that are due to malfunctioning brain oscillations.
30
Fineberg, N. "Feasibility and Acceptability of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder." European Psychiatry 65, S1 (June 2022): S12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2022.54.
Full textAbstract:
Background Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has shown promise as a treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) in a small number of trials. We performed a feasibility study to inform the development of a definitive trial, focussing on acceptability, safety, feasibility of recruitment, adherence and tolerability of tDCS and the size of any treatment-effect. Methods FEATSOCS was a randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled, cross-over multicentre study. Twenty adults with OCD received three courses of tDCS targeting the two most favourable stimulation targets; supplementary motor area (SMA), orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and sham-stimulation, randomly allocated and delivered in counterbalanced order. Each course comprised four 20 minute-stimulations, over two consecutive days, separated by a four weeks washout period. Clinical outcomes were assessed by ‘blinded’ raters before, during and four weeks after stimulation. Results: tDCS was acceptable, well tolerated and safe; adherence was good, with few dropouts, there were no serious adverse events, and adverse effects were mostly mild. Recruitment to target was feasible. Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale scores numerically improved from baseline to 24 hours after final stimulation (primary outcome) across all interventional groups. The greatest effect was seen in the OFC arm. Additional significant within-group improvements in secondary outcomes occurred in the OFC, and to a lesser extent in the sham arms, but not with SMA. Discussion tDCS appears a promising potential treatment for OCD. The OFC represents the optimal target. A full-scale trial to determine optimal stimulation protocols (current, frequency, duration), longer-term effectiveness and feasibility of home delivery is indicated. Disclosure No significant relationships.
31
GUO, Heng, Li HE, and Renlai ZHOU. "Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) improve memory function." Advances in Psychological Science 24, no. 3 (2016): 356. http://dx.doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1042.2016.00356.
Full text
32
Hupfeld, Kathleen E., Caroline J. Ketcham, and Harry D. Schneider. "Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) To Broca’s Area." Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 48 (May 2016): 814. http://dx.doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000487440.00923.ee.
Full text
33
Shin, Yong-Il, Águida Foerster, and Michael A. Nitsche. "Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) – Application in neuropsychology." Neuropsychologia 69 (March 2015): 154–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.02.002.
Full text
34
Brunelin, J. "T005 Transcranial Direct Current stimulation (tDCS) for schizophrenia." Clinical Neurophysiology 128, no. 3 (March 2017): e2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.104.
Full text
35
Khadka, Niranjan, Helen Borges-Delfino-De-Souza, Atta Boateng, Bhaskar Paneri, Jongmin Jang, Byungjik Kim, Kiwon Lee, and Marom Bikson. "Dry electrodes for transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)." Brain Stimulation 10, no. 4 (July 2017): e32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2017.04.046.
Full text
36
Silva, Leonardo Vinicius Diniz Cavalcante da, Flávia Porto, Felipe Fregni, and Jonas Lírio Gurgel. "TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT-CURRENT STIMULATION IN COMBINATION WITH EXERCISE: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW." Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte 25, no. 6 (December 2019): 520–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1517-869220192506215836.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACT Introduction Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive technique that allows the modulation of cortical excitability and can produce changes in neuronal plasticity. The application of tDCS has recently been associated with physical activity. Objectives To verify the effect of Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation (tDCS) in combination with physical exercise, characterizing methodological aspects of the technique. Methods In the database search, studies with animals, other neuromodulation techniques and opinion and review articles were excluded. Publications up to 2016 were selected and the methodological quality of the articles was verified through the PEDro scale. Results The majority of studies (86%) used tDCS on the motor cortex area, with anodal current and the allocation of monocephalic electrodes (46.5%). The prevalent current intensity was 2mA (72%), with duration of 20min (55.8%). The profile of the research participants was predominantly of subjects aged up to 60 years (72.1%). The outcomes were favorable for the use of anodal tDCS in combination with physical exercise. Conclusion Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation is a promising technique when used in combination with aerobic and anaerobic exercises; however, it is necessary to investigate concurrent exercise. Level of Evidence II; Therapeutic Studies Investigating the Results of Treatment (systematic review of Level II studies or Level I studies with inconsistent results).
37
Kashyap, Rajan, Sagarika Bhattacharjee, Ramaswamy Arumugam, Rose Dawn Bharath, Kaviraja Udupa, Kenichi Oishi, John E. Desmond, S. H. Annabel Chen, and Cuntai Guan. "Focality-Oriented Selection of Current Dose for Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation." Journal of Personalized Medicine 11, no. 9 (September 21, 2021): 940. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm11090940.
Full textAbstract:
Background: In transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), the injected current becomes distributed across the brain areas. The objective is to stimulate the target region of interest (ROI) while minimizing the current in non-target ROIs (the ‘focality’ of tDCS). For this purpose, determining the appropriate current dose for an individual is difficult. Aim: To introduce a dose–target determination index (DTDI) to quantify the focality of tDCS and examine the dose–focality relationship in three different populations. Method: Here, we extended our previous toolbox i-SATA to the MNI reference space. After a tDCS montage is simulated for a current dose, the i-SATA(MNI) computes the average (over voxels) current density for every region in the brain. DTDI is the ratio of the average current density at the target ROI to the ROI with a maximum value (the peak region). Ideally, target ROI should be the peak region, so DTDI shall range from 0 to 1. The higher the value, the better the dose. We estimated the variation of DTDI within and across individuals using T1-weighted brain images of 45 males and females distributed equally across three age groups: (a) young adults (20 ≤ x ˂ 40 years), (b) mid adults (40 ≤ x ˂ 60 years), and (c) older adults (60 ≤ x ˂ 80 years). DTDI’s were evaluated for the frontal montage with electrodes at F3 and the right supraorbital for three current doses of 1 mA, 2 mA, and 3 mA, with the target ROI at the left middle frontal gyrus. Result: As the dose is incremented, DTDI may show (a) increase, (b) decrease, and (c) no change across the individuals depending on the relationship (nonlinear or linear) between the injected tDCS current and the distribution of current density in the target ROI. The nonlinearity is predominant in older adults with a decrease in focality. The decline is stronger in males. Higher current dose at older age can enhance the focality of stimulation. Conclusion: DTDI provides information on which tDCS current dose will optimize the focality of stimulation. The recommended DTDI dose should be prioritized based on the age (>40 years) and sex (especially for males) of an individual. The toolbox i-SATA(MNI) is freely available.
38
Nitsche, M. A., S. Doemkes, T. Karaköse, A. Antal, D. Liebetanz, N. Lang, F. Tergau, and W. Paulus. "Shaping the Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Human Motor Cortex." Journal of Neurophysiology 97, no. 4 (April 2007): 3109–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.01312.2006.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial DC stimulation (tDCS) induces stimulation polarity-dependent neuroplastic excitability shifts in the human brain. Because it accomplishes long-lasting effects and its application is simple, it is used increasingly. However, one drawback is its low focality, caused by 1) the large stimulation electrode and 2) the functionally effective reference electrode, which is also situated on the scalp. We aimed to increase the focality of tDCS, which might improve the interpretation of the functional effects of stimulation because it will restrict its effects to more clearly defined cortical areas. Moreover, it will avoid unwanted reversed effects of tDCS under the reference electrode, which is of special importance in clinical settings, when a homogeneous shift of cortical excitability is needed. Because current density (current strength/electrode size) determines the efficacy of tDCS, increased focality should be accomplished by 1) reducing stimulation electrode size, but keeping current density constant; or 2) increasing reference electrode size under constant current strength. We tested these hypotheses for motor cortex tDCS. The results show that reducing the size of the motor cortex DC-stimulation electrode focalized the respective tDCS-induced excitability changes. Increasing the size of the frontopolar reference electrode rendered stimulation over this cortex functionally inefficient, but did not compromise the tDCS-generated motor cortical excitability shifts. Thus tDCS-generated modulations of cortical excitability can be focused by reducing the size of the stimulation electrode and by increasing the size of the reference electrode. For future applications of tDCS, such paradigms may help to achieve more selective tDCS effects.
39
Ahn, Hyochol, Chengxue Zhong, Setor Sorkpor, and Hongyu Miao. "HOME-BASED TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT-CURRENT STIMULATION AND EXPERIMENTAL PAIN SENSITIVITY." Innovation in Aging 3, Supplement_1 (November 2019): S338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igz038.1227.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee is one of the most common causes of pain in older adults. Clinic-based transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive brain stimulation technique that has been shown to reduce pain, but no published studies have reported using home-based self-administered tDCS in older adults with knee OA. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the effect of home-based tDCS on experimental pain sensitivity in older adults with knee OA. Twenty community-dwelling participants aged 50–85 years with knee OA pain received ten daily sessions of 2 mA tDCS for 20 minutes at home. A multimodal quantitative sensory testing battery was completed, including heat pain tolerance, pressure pain threshold, and punctate mechanical pain. Participants (75% female) had a mean age of 61 years, and a mean body mass index in the sample was 28.33 kg/m2. All 20 participants completed all ten home-based tDCS sessions without serious adverse effects. The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test showed that all the differences between the baseline measurements and experimental pain sensitivity measurements after 10 sessions were statistically significant. Effect sizes (Rosenthal’s R) were R = 0.35 for heat pain tolerance (P = 0.02), R = 0.40 for pressure pain threshold (P < 0.01), and R = 0.32 for punctate mechanical pain (P = 0.02). We demonstrated that home-based self-administered tDCS was feasible and reduced experimental pain sensitivity in older adults with knee OA. Future studies with well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.
40
Rivera-Urbina, Guadalupe Nathzidy, Michael A. Nitsche, Carmelo M. Vicario, and Andrés Molero-Chamizo. "Applications of transcranial direct current stimulation in children and pediatrics." Reviews in the Neurosciences 28, no. 2 (February 1, 2017): 173–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/revneuro-2016-0045.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulatory noninvasive brain stimulation tool with potential to increase or reduce regional and remote cortical excitability. Numerous studies have shown the ability of this technique to induce neuroplasticity and to modulate cognition and behavior in adults. Clinical studies have also demonstrated the ability of tDCS to induce therapeutic effects in several central nervous system disorders. However, knowledge about its ability to modulate brain functions in children or induce clinical improvements in pediatrics is limited. The objective of this review is to describe relevant data of some recent studies that may help to understand the potential of this technique in children with specific regard to effective and safe treatment of different developmental disorders in pediatrics. Overall, the results show that standard protocols of tDCS are well tolerated by children and have promising clinical effects. Nevertheless, treatment effects seem to be partially heterogeneous, and a case of a seizure in a child with previous history of infantile spasms and diagnosed epilepsy treated with tDCS for spasticity was reported. Further research is needed to determine safety criteria for tDCS use in children and to elucidate the particular neurophysiological changes induced by this neuromodulatory technique when it is applied in the developing brain.
41
Bergmann, Til Ole, Sergiu Groppa, Markus Seeger, Matthias Mölle, Lisa Marshall, and Hartwig Roman Siebner. "Acute Changes in Motor Cortical Excitability During Slow Oscillatory and Constant Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation." Journal of Neurophysiology 102, no. 4 (October 2009): 2303–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00437.2009.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial oscillatory current stimulation has recently emerged as a noninvasive technique that can interact with ongoing endogenous rhythms of the human brain. Yet, there is still little knowledge on how time-varied exogenous currents acutely modulate cortical excitability. In ten healthy individuals we used on-line single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to search for systematic shifts in corticospinal excitability during anodal sleeplike 0.8-Hz slow oscillatory transcranial direct current stimulation (so-tDCS). In separate sessions, we repeatedly applied 30-s trials (two blocks at 20 min) of either anodal so-tDCS or constant tDCS (c-tDCS) to the primary motor hand area during quiet wakefulness. Simultaneously and time-locked to different phase angles of the slow oscillation, motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) as an index of corticospinal excitability were obtained in the contralateral hand muscles 10, 20, and 30 s after the onset of tDCS. MEPs were also measured off-line before, between, and after both stimulation blocks to detect any lasting excitability shifts. Both tDCS modes increased MEP amplitudes during stimulation with an attenuation of the facilitatory effect toward the end of a 30-s tDCS trial. No phase-locking of corticospinal excitability to the exogenous oscillation was observed during so-tDCS. Off-line TMS revealed that both c-tDCS and so-tDCS resulted in a lasting excitability increase. The individual magnitude of MEP facilitation during the first tDCS trials predicted the lasting MEP facilitation found after tDCS. We conclude that sleep slow oscillation-like excitability changes cannot be actively imposed on the awake cortex with so-tDCS, but phase-independent on-line as well as off-line facilitation can reliably be induced.
42
Kristiansen, Mathias, Mikkel Jacobi Thomsen, Jens Nørgaard, Jon Aaes, Dennis Knudsen, and Michael Voigt. "Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation increases corticospinal excitability, while performance is unchanged." PLOS ONE 16, no. 7 (July 16, 2021): e0254888. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254888.
Full textAbstract:
Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) has been shown to improve bicycle time to fatigue (TTF) tasks at 70–80% of VO2max and downregulate rate of perceived exertion (RPE). This study aimed to investigate the effect of a-tDCS on a RPE-clamp test, a 250-kJ time trial (TT) and motor evoked potentials (MEP). Twenty participants volunteered for three trials; control, sham stimulation and a-tDCS. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to determine the corticospinal excitability for 12 participants pre and post sham stimulation and a-tDCS. The a-tDCS protocol consisted of 13 minutes of stimulation (2 mA) with the anode placed above the Cz. The RPE-clamp test consisted of 5 minutes ergometer bicycling at an RPE of 13 on the Borg scale, and the TT consisted of a 250 kJ (∼10 km) long bicycle ergometer test. During each test, power output, heart rate and oxygen consumption was measured, while RPE was evaluated. MEPs increased significantly by 36% (±36%) post a-tDCS, with 8.8% (±31%) post sham stimulation (p = 0.037). No significant changes were found for any parameter at the RPE-clamp or TT. The lack of improvement may be due to RPE being more controlled by afferent feedback during TT tests than during TTF tests. Based on the results of the present study, it is concluded that a-tDCS applied over Cz, does not enhance self-paced cycling performance.
43
Liu, Hui-Hua, Xiao-Kuo He, Hsin-Yung Chen, Chih-Wei Peng, Alexander Rotenberg, Chi-Hung Juan, Yu-Cheng Pei, et al. "Neuromodulatory Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Motor Excitability in Rats." Neural Plasticity 2019 (December 17, 2019): 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/4252943.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive technique for modulating neural plasticity and is considered to have therapeutic potential in neurological disorders. For the purpose of translational neuroscience research, a suitable animal model can be ideal for providing a stable condition for identifying mechanisms that can help to explore therapeutic strategies. Here, we developed a tDCS protocol for modulating motor excitability in anesthetized rats. To examine the responses of tDCS-elicited plasticity, the motor evoked potential (MEP) and MEP input-output (IO) curve elicited by epidural motor cortical electrical stimulus were evaluated at baseline and after 30 min of anodal tDCS or cathodal tDCS. Furthermore, a paired-pulse cortical electrical stimulus was applied to assess changes in the inhibitory network by measuring long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI) before and after tDCS. In the results, analogous to those observed in humans, the present study demonstrates long-term potentiation- (LTP-) and long-term depression- (LTD-) like plasticity can be induced by tDCS protocol in anesthetized rats. We found that the MEPs were significantly enhanced immediately after anodal tDCS at 0.1 mA and 0.8 mA and remained enhanced for 30 min. Similarly, MEPs were suppressed immediately after cathodal tDCS at 0.8 mA and lasted for 30 min. No effect was noted on the MEP magnitude under sham tDCS stimulation. Furthermore, the IO curve slope was elevated following anodal tDCS and presented a trend toward diminished slope after cathodal tDCS. No significant differences in the LICI ratio of pre- to post-tDCS were observed. These results indicated that developed tDCS schemes can produce consistent, rapid, and controllable electrophysiological changes in corticomotor excitability in rats. This newly developed tDCS animal model could be useful to further explore mechanical insights and may serve as a translational platform bridging human and animal studies, establishing new therapeutic strategies for neurological disorders.
44
AR, Khatoonabadi. "The Effectiveness of transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) for Improving the Naming of a Patient with Apraxia: A Single Case Study." Neurology & Neurotherapy Open Access Journal 4, no. 3 (2019): 1–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.23880/nnoaj-16000144.
Full textAbstract:
Aim: Studies have shown that transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) can modulate cortical activity and performance of both healthy and brain - damaged people. In the present study, we investigated the effect of tDCS on the recovery of naming in one patient with apraxia of speech. Methods: After establishing a baseline in 3 weeks, the participant received regular speech therapy for 3 weeks alongside with tDCS. The participant received anodic stimulation over the left inferior frontal gyrus (Broca’s ar ea) while he performed the repetition task. Results: The results showed that the participant improved in the naming task after language treatment combined with tDCS in the treatment phase in comparison to the baseline phase, and this difference was clinica lly significant (RCI=2.652). Discussion: This study showed that associating the language therapy with noninvasive brain stimulation (e.g. tDCS) can have a positive effect on rehabilitation outcomes in patients with acquired apraxia of speech.
45
Yoon, Eun Jin, Yu Kyeong Kim, Hye-Ri Kim, Sang Eun Kim, Youngjo Lee, and Hyung Ik Shin. "Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Lessen Neuropathic Pain After Spinal Cord Injury." Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 28, no. 3 (November 8, 2013): 250–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1545968313507632.
Full textAbstract:
Background. It is suggested that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can produce lasting changes in corticospinal excitability and can potentially be used for the treatment of neuropathic pain. However, the detailed mechanisms underlying the effects of tDCS are unknown. Objective. We investigated the underlying neural mechanisms of tDCS for chronic pain relief using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ([18F]FDG-PET). Methods. Sixteen patients with neuropathic pain (mean age 44.1 ± 8.6 years, 4 females) due to traumatic spinal cord injury received sham or active anodal stimulation of the motor cortex using tDCS for 10 days (20 minutes, 2 mA, twice a day). The effect of tDCS on regional cerebral glucose metabolism was evaluated by [18F]FDG-PET before and after tDCS sessions. Results. There was a significant decrease in the numeric rating scale scores for pain, from 7.6 ± 0.5 at baseline to 5.9 ± 1.8 after active tDCS ( P = .016). We found increased metabolism in the medulla and decreased metabolism in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex after active tDCS treatment compared with the changes induced by sham tDCS. Additionally, an increase in metabolism after active tDCS was observed in the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex and insula. Conclusion. The results of this study suggest that anodal stimulation of the motor cortex using tDCS can modulate emotional and cognitive components of pain and normalize excessive attention to pain and pain-related information.
46
Kidgell, Dawson J., Robin M. Daly, Kayleigh Young, Jarrod Lum, Gregory Tooley, Shapour Jaberzadeh, Maryam Zoghi, and Alan J. Pearce. "Different Current Intensities of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Do Not Differentially Modulate Motor Cortex Plasticity." Neural Plasticity 2013 (2013): 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/603502.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive technique that modulates the excitability of neurons within the motor cortex (M1). Although the aftereffects of anodal tDCS on modulating cortical excitability have been described, there is limited data describing the outcomes of different tDCS intensities on intracortical circuits. To further elucidate the mechanisms underlying the aftereffects of M1 excitability following anodal tDCS, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to examine the effect of different intensities on cortical excitability and short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI). Using a randomized, counterbalanced, crossover design, with a one-week wash-out period, 14 participants (6 females and 8 males, 22–45 years) were exposed to 10 minutes of anodal tDCS at 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2 mA. TMS was used to measure M1 excitability and SICI of the contralateral wrist extensor muscle at baseline, immediately after and 15 and 30 minutes following cessation of anodal tDCS. Cortical excitability increased, whilst SICI was reduced at all time points following anodal tDCS. Interestingly, there were no differences between the three intensities of anodal tDCS on modulating cortical excitability or SICI. These results suggest that the aftereffect of anodal tDCS on facilitating cortical excitability is due to the modulation of synaptic mechanisms associated with long-term potentiation and is not influenced by different tDCS intensities.
47
Reis, Janine, and Brita Fritsch. "Transcranial Electrical Brain Stimulation." Neurology International Open 01, no. 03 (June 2017): E142—E147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-102478.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractTranscranial electrical brain stimulation using weak direct current (tDCS) or alternating current (tACS) is being increasingly used in clinical and experimental settings to improve cognitive and motor functions in healthy subjects as well as neurological patients. This review focuses on the therapeutic value of transcranial direct current stimulation for neurorehabilitation and provides an overview of studies addressing motor and non-motor symptoms after stroke, disorders of attention and consciousness as well as Parkinson’s disease.
48
Green, Peta E., Andrea Loftus, and Rebecca A. Anderson. "Protocol for Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder." Brain Sciences 10, no. 12 (December 18, 2020): 1008. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10121008.
Full textAbstract:
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a debilitating disorder with an approximate lifetime prevalence of 1–3%. Despite advances in leading treatment modalities, including pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, some cases remain treatment resistant. Non-invasive brain stimulation has been explored in this treatment-resistant population with some promising findings; however, a lack of methodological rigor has reduced the quality of the findings. The current paper presents the protocol for conducting research into the efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in the treatment of OCD. A double-blind randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted involving active tDCS vs. sham tDCS on 40 general OCD patients. The intervention consists of 2 mA anodal stimulation over the pre-supplementary motor area (pre-SMA) with the cathode positioned over the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC). Participants will receive 10 sessions of 20 min of either sham- or active-tDCS over 4 weeks. Outcomes will be categorical and dimensional measures of OCD, as well as related secondary clinical measures (depression, anxiety, quality of life), and neurocognitive functions (inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility).
49
Talsma, Lotte J., Henryk A. Kroese, and Heleen A. Slagter. "Boosting Cognition: Effects of Multiple-Session Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Working Memory." Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 29, no. 4 (April 2017): 755–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01077.
Full textAbstract:
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a promising tool for neurocognitive enhancement. Several studies have shown that just a single session of tDCS over the left dorsolateral pFC (lDLPFC) can improve the core cognitive function of working memory (WM) in healthy adults. Yet, recent studies combining multiple sessions of anodal tDCS over lDLPFC with verbal WM training did not observe additional benefits of tDCS in subsequent stimulation sessions nor transfer of benefits to novel WM tasks posttraining. Using an enhanced stimulation protocol as well as a design that included a baseline measure each day, the current study aimed to further investigate the effects of multiple sessions of tDCS on WM. Specifically, we investigated the effects of three subsequent days of stimulation with anodal (20 min, 1 mA) versus sham tDCS (1 min, 1 mA) over lDLPFC (with a right supraorbital reference) paired with a challenging verbal WM task. WM performance was measured with a verbal WM updating task (the letter n-back) in the stimulation sessions and several WM transfer tasks (different letter set n-back, spatial n-back, operation span) before and 2 days after stimulation. Anodal tDCS over lDLPFC enhanced WM performance in the first stimulation session, an effect that remained visible 24 hr later. However, no further gains of anodal tDCS were observed in the second and third stimulation sessions, nor did benefits transfer to other WM tasks at the group level. Yet, interestingly, post hoc individual difference analyses revealed that in the anodal stimulation group the extent of change in WM performance on the first day of stimulation predicted pre to post changes on both the verbal and the spatial transfer task. Notably, this relationship was not observed in the sham group. Performance of two individuals worsened during anodal stimulation and on the transfer tasks. Together, these findings suggest that repeated anodal tDCS over lDLPFC combined with a challenging WM task may be an effective method to enhance domain-independent WM functioning in some individuals, but not others, or can even impair WM. They thus call for a thorough investigation into individual differences in tDCS respondence as well as further research into the design of multisession tDCS protocols that may be optimal for boosting cognition across a wide range of individuals.
50
Chhabra, Harleen, Venkataram Shivakumar, Sri Mahavir Agarwal, Anushree Bose, Deepthi Venugopal, Ashwini Rajasekaran, Manjula Subbanna, et al. "Transcranial direct current stimulation and neuroplasticity genes: implications for psychiatric disorders." Acta Neuropsychiatrica 28, no. 1 (April 16, 2015): 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/neu.2015.20.
Full textAbstract:
Background and AimTranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive and well-tolerated brain stimulation technique with promising efficacy as an add-on treatment for schizophrenia and for several other psychiatric disorders. tDCS modulates neuroplasticity; psychiatric disorders are established to be associated with neuroplasticity abnormalities. This review presents the summary of research on potential genetic basis of neuroplasticity-modulation mechanism underlying tDCS and its implications for treating various psychiatric disorders.MethodA systematic review highlighting the genes involved in neuroplasticity and their role in psychiatric disorders was carried out. The focus was on the established genetic findings of tDCS response relationship with BDNF and COMT gene polymorphisms.ResultSynthesis of these preliminary observations suggests the potential influence of neuroplastic genes on tDCS treatment response. These include several animal models, pharmacological studies, mentally ill and healthy human subject trials.ConclusionTaking into account the rapidly unfolding understanding of tDCS and the role of synaptic plasticity disturbances in neuropsychiatric disorders, in-depth evaluation of the mechanism of action pertinent to neuroplasticity modulation with tDCS needs further systematic research. Genes such as NRG1, DISC1, as well as those linked with the glutamatergic receptor in the context of their direct role in the modulation of neuronal signalling related to neuroplasticity aberrations, are leading candidates for future research in this area. Such research studies might potentially unravel observations that might have potential translational implications in psychiatry.