Hamzeh Baharlouei; Ebrahim Sadeghi-demneh; Mohammad Mehravar; Parisa Manzari; Mohammad Jafar Shaterzadeh Yazdi; Mohammad Taghi Joghataei; Shapour Jaberzadeh
Volume 22, Issue 3 , 2020
Abstract
Background: Falling is a major problem in older adults. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulation technique to improve balance in the elderly. The majority of previous studies have assessed the effects of cerebellar and primary motor cortex (M1) tDCS, while less attention ...
Read More
Background: Falling is a major problem in older adults. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a neuromodulation technique to improve balance in the elderly. The majority of previous studies have assessed the effects of cerebellar and primary motor cortex (M1) tDCS, while less attention has been paid to the comparison of the effects of tDCS in these two regions.
Objectives: The goal of this study was to compare the effectiveness of cerebellum and M1 tDCS on the balance in older adults.
Methods: In this double-blind sham-controlled crossover study, a total of 32 healthy older adults were randomly assigned to two groups of M1 and cerebellum tDCS. Each group received active and sham stimulation with a crossover design within a one-week interval. The intensity and duration of tDCS were 2 mA and 20 minutes, respectively. Before and after each session, the total path length (TPL) and mean velocity (MV) of the center of pressure were determined using a force plate in both mediolateral and anteroposterior directions under single-task and dual-task conditions.
Results: The results of mixed ANOVA test showed that the main effect of time on TPL and MV was significant in both mediolateral (P < 0.01) and anteroposterior (P = 0.01) directions. The interaction between time and stimulation was also significant on TPL and MV in both mediolateral (P < 0.001) and anteroposterior (P < 0.001) directions. The between-group analysis showed no significant difference in the efficacy of cerebellar and M1 tDCS in the mediolateral (P = 0.79) and anteroposterior (P = 0.60) directions.
Conclusions: Anodal tDCS of the cerebellum and M1 could improve the postural balance indices in healthy older adults. These two techniques exerted similar effects on static balance.
Ailin Talimkhani; Iraj Abdollahi; Maryam Zoghi; Elaheh Talebi Ghane; Shapour Jaberzadeh
Volume 20, Issue 7 , 2018, Pages 1-7
Abstract
Background: Unihemispheric concurrent dual-site anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCSUHCDS) of the primary mo- tor cortex (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) are introduced as effective techniques on M1 corticospinal excitability enhancement and its after-effects. Objectives: ...
Read More
Background: Unihemispheric concurrent dual-site anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCSUHCDS) of the primary mo- tor cortex (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) are introduced as effective techniques on M1 corticospinal excitability enhancement and its after-effects. Objectives: The current study aimed at investigating the potential effects of multiple sessions of a-tDCSUHCDS of M1-DLPFC on motor skills learning in healthy individuals.Methods: The randomized, clinical trial was conducted on a total of 37 volunteers completed all sessions of the study and were randomly divided into two groups of a-tDCSUHCDS and sham stimulation by the block randomization method. The current study was performed from January to May 2017 in Iran. Participants attended daily 20-minute motor training sessions for three consecu- tive days, while they concurrently received a-tDCS. Motor skills were assessed before the intervention (day 1), immediately after the intervention (day 3), and one week after the completion of the intervention.Results: A total of 37 participants were included in the data analysis. Immediately after the completion of the intervention on day 3, mean skills in the experimental and control groups were 0.33 and 0.30, respectively. One week after the completion of the interven- tion, mean skills in the experimental and control groups were 0.36 and 0.29, respectively. The trend of motor learning considerably increased in the experimental (0.17; P < 0.001) and control (0.11; P < 0.001) groups. No significant difference was observed in mo- tor learning immediately after the intervention between the groups (P = 0.23), while there was a significant difference in long-term offline learning between the groups (P = 0.04).Conclusions: Greater motor skills in the a-tDCSUHCDS group compared with the sham tDCS group at one-week retention indicated the robustness of the a-tDCSUHCDS effect.
