Dual-tDCS Enhances Online Motor Skill Learning and Long-Term Retention in Chronic Stroke Patients

Enhancing endogenous capacity to repair a stroke-damaged brain: An evolving field for stroke research

Stroke represents a severe medical condition that causes stroke survivors to suffer from long-term and even lifelong disability. Over the past several decades, a vast majority of stroke research targets neuroprotection in the acute phase, while little work has been done to enhance stroke recovery at the later stage. Through reviewing current understanding of brain plasticity, stroke pathology, and emerging preclinical and clinical restorative approaches, this review aims to provide new insights to advance the research field for stroke recovery. Lifelong brain plasticity offers the long-lasting possibility to repair a stroke-damaged brain. Stroke impairs the structural and functional integrity of entire brain networks; the restorative approaches containing multi-components have great potential to maximize stroke recovery by rebuilding and normalizing the stroke-disrupted entire brain networks and brain functioning. The restorative window for stroke recovery is much longer than previously thought. The optimal time for brain repair appears to be at later stage of stroke rather than the earlier stage. It is expected that these new insights will advance our understanding of stroke recovery and assist in developing the next generation of restorative approaches for enhancing brain repair after stroke.

Modulating Brain Connectivity by Simultaneous Dual-Mode Stimulation over Bilateral Primary Motor Cortices in Subacute Stroke Patients

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been used for the modulation of stroke patients' motor function. Recently, more challenging approaches have been studied. In this study, simultaneous stimulation using both rTMS and tDCS (dual-mode stimulation) over bilateral primary motor cortices (M1s) was investigated to compare its modulatory effects with single rTMS stimulation over the ipsilesional M1 in subacute stroke patients. Twenty-four patients participated; 12 participants were assigned to the dual-mode stimulation group while the other 12 participants were assigned to the rTMS-only group. We assessed each patient's motor function using the Fugl-Meyer assessment score and acquired their resting-state fMRI data at two times: prior to stimulation and 2 months after stimulation. Twelve healthy subjects were also recruited as the control group. The interhemispheric connectivity of the contralesional M1, interhemispheric connectivity between bilateral hemispheres, and global efficiency of the motor network noticeably increased in the dual-mode stimulation group compared to the rTMS-only group. Contrary to the dual-mode stimulation group, there was no significant change in the rTMS-only group. These data suggested that simultaneous dual-mode stimulation contributed to the recovery of interhemispheric interaction than rTMS only in subacute stroke patients. This trial is registered with NCT03279640.

Two Processes in Early Bimanual Motor Skill Learning

Most daily activities are bimanual and their efficient performance requires learning and retention of bimanual coordination. Despite in-depth knowledge of the various stages of motor skill learning in general, how new bimanual coordination control policies are established is still unclear. We designed a new cooperative bimanual task in which subjects had to move a cursor across a complex path (a circuit) as fast and as accurately as possible through coordinated bimanual movements. By looking at the transfer of the skill between different circuits and by looking at training with varying circuits, we identified two processes in early bimanual motor learning. Loss of performance due to the switch in circuit after 15 min of training amounted to 20%, which suggests that a significant portion of improvements in bimanual performance is specific to the used circuit (circuit-specific skill). In contrast, the loss of performance due to the switch in circuit was 5% after 4 min of training. This suggests that learning the new bimanual coordination control policy dominates early in the training and is independent of the used circuit. Finally, switching between two circuits throughout training did not affect the early stage of learning (i.e., the first few minutes), but did affect the later stage. Together, these results suggest that early bimanual motor skill learning includes two different processes. Learning the new bimanual coordination control policy predominates in the first minutes whereas circuit-specific skill improvements unfold later in parallel with further improvements in the bimanual coordination control policy.

Modulating hemispheric lateralization by brain stimulation yields gain in mental and physical activity

Imagery plays an important role in our life. Motor imagery is the mental simulation of a motor act without overt motor output. Previous studies have documented the effect of motor imagery practice. However, its translational potential for patients as well as for athletes, musicians and other groups, depends largely on the transfer from mental practice to overt physical performance. We used bilateral transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over sensorimotor areas to modulate neural lateralization patterns induced by unilateral mental motor imagery and the performance of a physical motor task. Twenty-six healthy older adults participated (mean age = 67.1 years) in a double-blind cross-over sham-controlled study. We found stimulation-related changes at the neural and behavioural level, which were polarity-dependent. Specifically, for the hand contralateral to the anode, electroencephalographic activity induced by motor imagery was more lateralized and motor performance improved. In contrast, for the hand contralateral to the cathode, hemispheric lateralization was reduced. The stimulation-related increase and decrease in neural lateralization were negatively related. Further, the degree of stimulation-related change in neural lateralization correlated with the stimulation-related change on behavioural level. These convergent neurophysiological and behavioural effects underline the potential of tDCS to improve mental and physical motor performance.

Multifocal tDCS targeting the resting state motor network increases cortical excitability beyond traditional tDCS targeting unilateral motor cortex

Scientists and clinicians have traditionally targeted single brain regions with stimulation to modulate brain function and disease. However, brain regions do not operate in isolation, but interact with other regions through networks. As such, stimulation of one region may impact and be impacted by other regions in its network. Here we test whether the effects of brain stimulation can be enhanced by simultaneously targeting a region and its network, identified with resting state functional connectivity MRI. Fifteen healthy participants received two types of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): a traditional two-electrode montage targeting a single brain region (left primary motor cortex [M1]) and a novel eight-electrode montage targeting this region and its associated resting state network. As a control, 8 participants also received multifocal tDCS mismatched to this network. Network-targeted tDCS more than doubled the increase in left M1 excitability over time compared to traditional tDCS and the multifocal control. Modeling studies suggest these results are unlikely to be due to tDCS effects on left M1 itself, however it is impossible to completely exclude this possibility. It also remains unclear whether multifocal tDCS targeting a network selectively modulates this network and which regions within the network are most responsible for observed effects. Despite these limitations, network-targeted tDCS appears to be a promising approach for enhancing tDCS effects beyond traditional stimulation targeting a single brain region. Future work is needed to test whether these results extend to other resting state networks and enhance behavioral or therapeutic effects.

Anatomical Parameters of tDCS to Modulate the Motor System after Stroke: A Review

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation method to modulate the local field potential in neural tissue and consequently, cortical excitability. As tDCS is relatively portable, affordable, and accessible, the applications of tDCS to probe brain-behavior connections have rapidly increased in the last 10 years. One of the most promising applications is the use of tDCS to modulate excitability in the motor cortex after stroke and promote motor recovery. However, the results of clinical studies implementing tDCS to modulate motor excitability have been highly variable, with some studies demonstrating that as many as 50% or more of patients fail to show a response to stimulation. Much effort has therefore been dedicated to understand the sources of variability affecting tDCS efficacy. Possible suspects include the placement of the electrodes, task parameters during stimulation, dosing (current amplitude, duration of stimulation, frequency of stimulation), individual states (e.g., anxiety, motivation, attention), and more. In this review, we first briefly review potential sources of variability specific to stroke motor recovery following tDCS. We then examine how the anatomical variability in tDCS placement [e.g., neural target(s) and montages employed] may alter the neuromodulatory effects that tDCS exerts on the post-stroke motor system.

Advancing non-invasive neuromodulation clinical trials in children: Lessons from perinatal stroke

Applications of non-invasive brain stimulation including therapeutic neuromodulation are expanding at an alarming rate. Increasingly established scientific principles, including directional modulation of well-informed cortical targets, are advancing clinical trial development. However, high levels of disease burden coupled with zealous enthusiasm may be getting ahead of rational research and evidence. Experience is limited in the developing brain where additional issues must be considered. Properly designed and meticulously executed clinical trials are essential and required to advance and optimize the potential of non-invasive neuromodulation without risking the well-being of children and families. Perinatal stroke causes most hemiplegic cerebral palsy and, as a focal injury of defined timing in an otherwise healthy brain, is an ideal human model of developmental plasticity. Advanced models of how the motor systems of young brains develop following early stroke are affording novel windows of opportunity for neuromodulation clinical trials, possibly directing neuroplasticity toward better outcomes. Reviewing the principles of clinical trial design relevant to neuromodulation and using perinatal stroke as a model, this article reviews the current and future issues of advancing such trials in children.

Explicit motor sequence learning with the paretic arm after stroke

PURPOSE

Motor sequence learning is important for stroke recovery, but experimental tasks require dexterous movements, which are impossible for people with upper limb impairment. This makes it difficult to draw conclusions about the impact of stroke on learning motor sequences. We aimed to test a paradigm requiring gross arm movements to determine whether stroke survivors with upper limb impairment were capable of learning a movement sequence as effectively as age-matched controls.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this case-control study, 12 stroke survivors (10-138 months post-stroke, mean age 64 years) attempted the task once using their affected arm. Ten healthy controls (mean 66 years) used their non-dominant arm. A sequence of 10 movements was repeated 25 times. The variables were: time from target illumination until the cursor left the central square (onset time; OT), accuracy (path length), and movement speed.

RESULTS

OT reduced with training (p < 0.05) for both groups, with no change in movement speed or accuracy (p > 0.1). We quantified learning as the OT difference between the end of training and a random sequence; this was smaller for stroke survivors than controls (p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Stroke survivors can learn a movement sequence with their paretic arm, but demonstrate impairments in sequence specific learning. Implications for Rehabilitation Motor sequence learning is important for recovery of movement after stroke. Stroke survivors were found to be capable of learning a movement sequence with their paretic arm, supporting the concept of repetitive task training for recovery of movement. Stroke survivors showed impaired sequence specific learning in comparison with age-matched controls, indicating that they may need more repetitions of a sequence in order to re-learn movements. Further research is required into the effect of lesion location, time since stroke, hand dominance and gender on learning of motor sequences after stroke.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for children with perinatal stroke and hemiparesis

Objective:

To determine whether the addition of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to intensive therapy increases motor function in children with perinatal stroke and hemiparetic cerebral palsy.

Methods:

This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical trial. Participants were recruited from a population-based cohort with MRI-classified unilateral perinatal stroke, age of 6 to 18 years, and disabling hemiparesis. All completed a goal-directed, peer-supported, 2-week after-school motor learning camp (32 hours of therapy). Participants were randomized 1:1 to 1 mA cathodal tDCS over the contralesional primary motor cortex (M1) for the initial 20 minutes of daily therapy or sham. Primary subjective (Canadian Occupational Performance Measure [COPM]), objective (Assisting Hand Assessment [AHA]), safety, and secondary outcomes were measured at 1 week and 2 months after intervention. Analysis was by intention to treat.

Results:

Twenty-four participants were randomized (median age 11.8 ± 2.7 years, range 6.7–17.8). COPM performance and satisfaction scores doubled at 1 week with sustained gains at 2 months (p < 0.001). COPM scores increased more with tDCS compared to sham control (p = 0.004). AHA scores demonstrated only mild increases at both time points with no tDCS effects. Procedures were safe and well tolerated with no decrease in either arm function or serious adverse events.

Conclusion:

tDCS trials appear feasible and safe in hemiparetic children. Lack of change in objective motor function may reflect underdosing of therapy. Marked gains in subjective function with tDCS warrant further study.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:

NCT02170285.

Classification of evidence:

This study provides Class II evidence that for children with perinatal stroke and hemiparetic cerebral palsy, the addition of tDCS to moderate-dose motor learning therapy does not significantly improve motor function as measured by the AHA.

Using Technology, Bioinformatics and Health Informatics Approaches to Improve Learning Experiences in Optometry Education, Research and Practice

Rapid advances in ocular diagnostic approaches and emerging links of pathological changes in the eye with systemic disorders have widened the scope of optometry as the front line of eye health care. Expanding professional requirements stipulate that optometry students get a meticulous training in relevant information and communication technologies (ICT) and various bioinformatics and health informatics software to meet current and future challenges. Greater incorporation of ICT approaches in optometry education can facilitate increased student engagement in shared learning experiences and improve collaborative learning. This, in turn, will enable students to participate in and prepare for the complex real-world situations. A judicious use of ICTs by teachers in learning endeavors can help students develop innovative patterns of thinking to be a successful optometry professional. ICT-facilitated learning enables students and professionals to carry out their own research and take initiatives and thus shifts the equilibrium towards self-education. It is important that optometry and allied vision science schools adapt to the changing professional requirements with pedagogical evolution and react appropriately to provide the best educational experience for the students and teachers. This review aims to highlight the scope of ICT applications in optometry education and professional development drawing from similar experiences in other disciplines. Further, while enhanced use of ICT in optometry has the potential to create opportunities for transformative learning experiences, many schools use it merely to reinforce conventional teaching practices. Tremendous developments in ICT should allow educators to consider using ICT tools to enhance communication as well as providing a novel, richer, and more meaningful medium for the comprehensive knowledge construction in optometry and allied health disciplines.

Increased functional connectivity one week after motor learning and tDCS in stroke patients

Recent studies using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) demonstrated that changes in functional connectivity (FC) after stroke correlate with recovery. The aim of this study was to explore whether combining motor learning to dual transcranial direct current stimulation (dual-tDCS, applied over both primary motor cortices (M1)) modulated FC in stroke patients. Twenty-two chronic hemiparetic stroke patients participated in a baseline rs-fMRI session. One week later, dual-tDCS/sham was applied during motor skill learning (intervention session); one week later, the retention session started with the acquisition of a run of rs-fMRI imaging. The intervention+retention sessions were performed once with dual-tDCS and once with sham in a randomized, cross-over, placebo-controlled, double-blind design. A whole-brain independent component analysis based analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrated no changes between baseline and sham sessions in the somatomotor network, whereas a FC increase was observed one week after dual-tDCS compared to baseline (qFDR <0.05, t₆₃=4.15). A seed-based analysis confirmed specific stimulation-driven changes within a network of motor and premotor regions in both hemispheres. At baseline and one week after sham, the strongest FC was observed between the M1 and dorsal premotor cortex (PMd) of the undamaged hemisphere. In contrast, one week after dual-tDCS, the strongest FC was found between the M1 and PMd of the damaged hemisphere. Thus, a single session of dual-tDCS combined with motor skill learning increases FC in the somatomotor network of chronic stroke patients for one week.

Foreknowledge of an impending startling stimulus does not affect the proportion of startle reflexes or latency of StartReact responses

During a simple reaction time (RT) task, movements can be initiated early and involuntarily through presentation of a loud startling acoustic stimulus (SAS), a phenomenon termed the StartReact effect. In order to infer that activity in startle-related structures led to the early response triggering, it is important to observe a concurrent startle reflex in sternocleidomastoid. It is generally accepted that to consistently elicit a startle reflex, the SAS must be both intense and unpredictable. However, it remains unclear what effect explicit foreknowledge of an impending SAS has on the effectiveness of a SAS to elicit a startle reflex when preparing a motor response. To test this, participants completed two separate blocks of a simple RT task (counterbalanced order), where the control auditory go-signal was replaced with a SAS on 20 % of trials. In an unwarned block, knowledge of the trial type (SAS vs. control) was not provided in advance, while in a warned block, the trial type was forewarned. Results revealed that while foreknowledge of an impending SAS reduced the magnitude of the startle reflex, it did not affect the proportion of startle reflexes elicited or the magnitude of the StartReact effect. An increase in control trial RT was observed during the unwarned block, but only when it was performed first. These results indicate that preparation of a motor response leads to sufficiently increased activation in startle-related neural structures such that even with explicit knowledge of an upcoming SAS, participants are unable to proactively gate the upcoming sensory input.

Bihemispheric-tDCS and Upper Limb Rehabilitation Improves Retention of Motor Function in Chronic Stroke: A Pilot Study

Background: Single sessions of bihemispheric transcranial direct-current stimulation (bihemispheric-tDCS) with concurrent rehabilitation improves motor function in stroke survivors, which outlasts the stimulation period. However few studies have investigated the behavioral and neurophysiological adaptations following a multi-session intervention of bihemispheric-tDCS concurrent with rehabilitation.

Objective: This pilot study explored the immediate and lasting effects of 3-weeks of bihemispheric-tDCS and upper limb (UL) rehabilitation on motor function and corticospinal plasticity in chronic stroke survivors.

Methods: Fifteen chronic stroke survivors underwent 3-weeks of UL rehabilitation with sham or real bihemispheric-tDCS. UL motor function was assessed via the Motor Assessment Scale (MAS), Tardieu Scale and grip strength. Corticospinal plasticity was indexed by motor evoked potentials (MEPs), cortical silent period (CSP) and short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) recorded from the paretic and non-paretic ULs, using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Measures were taken at baseline, 48 h post and 3-weeks following (follow-up) the intervention.

Results: MAS improved following both real-tDCS (62%) and sham-tDCS (43%, P < 0.001), however at 3-weeks follow-up, the real-tDCS condition retained these newly regained motor skills to a greater degree than sham-tDCS (real-tDCS 64%, sham-tDCS 21%, P = 0.002). MEP amplitudes from the paretic UL increased for real-tDCS (46%: P < 0.001) and were maintained at 3-weeks follow-up (38%: P = 0.03), whereas no changes were observed with sham-tDCS. No changes in MEPs from the non-paretic nor SICI from the paretic UL were observed for either group. SICI from the non-paretic UL was greater at follow-up, for real-tDCS (27%: P = 0.04). CSP from the non-paretic UL increased by 33% following the intervention for real-tDCS compared with sham-tDCS (P = 0.04), which was maintained at 3-weeks follow-up (24%: P = 0.04).

Conclusion: bihemispheric-tDCS improved retention of gains in motor function, which appears to be modulated through intracortical inhibitory pathways in the contralesional primary motor cortex (M1). The findings provide preliminary evidence for the benefits of bihemispheric-tDCS during rehabilitation. Larger clinical trials are warranted to examine long term benefits of bihemispheric-tDCS in a stroke affected population.

Transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates motor learning post-stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an attractive protocol for stroke motor recovery. The current systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effects of tDCS on motor learning post-stroke. Specifically, we determined long-term learning effects by examining motor improvements from baseline to at least 5 days after tDCS intervention and motor practise. 17 studies reported long-term retention testing (mean retention interval=43.8 days; SD=56.6 days) and qualified for inclusion in our meta-analysis. Assessing primary outcome measures for groups that received tDCS and motor practise versus sham control groups created 21 valid comparisons: (1) 16 clinical assessments and (2) 5 motor skill acquisition tests. A random effects model meta-analysis showed a significant overall effect size=0.59 (p<0.0001; low heterogeneity, T(2)=0.04; I(2)=22.75%; and high classic fail-safe N=240). 4 moderator variable analyses revealed beneficial effects of tDCS on long-term motor learning: (1) stimulation protocols: anodal on the ipsilesional hemisphere, cathodal on the contralesional hemisphere, or bilateral; (2) recovery stage: subacute or chronic stroke; (3) stimulation timing: tDCS before or during motor practise; and (4) task-specific training or conventional rehabilitation protocols. This robust meta-analysis identified novel long-term motor learning effects with tDCS and motor practise post-stroke.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Over the Primary and Secondary Somatosensory Cortices Transiently Improves Tactile Spatial Discrimination in Stroke Patients

In healthy subjects, dual hemisphere transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary (S1) and secondary somatosensory cortices (S2) has been found to transiently enhance tactile performance. However, the effect of dual hemisphere tDCS on tactile performance in stroke patients with sensory deficits remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether dual hemisphere tDCS over S1 and S2 could enhance tactile discrimination in stroke patients. We employed a double-blind, crossover, sham-controlled experimental design. Eight chronic stroke patients with sensory deficits participated in this study. We used a grating orientation task (GOT) to measure the tactile discriminative threshold of the affected and non-affected index fingers before, during, and 10 min after four tDCS conditions. For both the S1 and S2 conditions, we placed an anodal electrode over the lesioned hemisphere and a cathodal electrode over the opposite hemisphere. We applied tDCS at an intensity of 2 mA for 15 min in both S1 and S2 conditions. We included two sham conditions in which the positions of the electrodes and the current intensity were identical to that in the S1 and S2 conditions except that current was delivered for the initial 15 s only. We found that GOT thresholds for the affected index finger during and 10 min after the S1 and S2 conditions were significantly lower compared with each sham condition. GOT thresholds were not significantly different between the S1 and S2 conditions at any time point. We concluded that dual-hemisphere tDCS over S1 and S2 can transiently enhance tactile discriminative task performance in chronic stroke patients with sensory dysfunction.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving activities of daily living, and physical and cognitive functioning, in people after stroke

BACKGROUND

Stroke is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Functional impairment, resulting in poor performance in activities of daily living (ADLs) among stroke survivors is common. Current rehabilitation approaches have limited effectiveness in improving ADL performance, function, muscle strength and cognitive abilities (including spatial neglect) after stroke, but a possible adjunct to stroke rehabilitation might be non-invasive brain stimulation by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to modulate cortical excitability, and hence to improve ADL performance, arm and leg function, muscle strength and cognitive abilities (including spatial neglect), dropouts and adverse events in people after stroke.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of tDCS on ADLs, arm and leg function, muscle strength and cognitive abilities (including spatial neglect), dropouts and adverse events in people after stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (February 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library; 2015, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1948 to February 2015), EMBASE (1980 to February 2015), CINAHL (1982 to February 2015), AMED (1985 to February 2015), Science Citation Index (1899 to February 2015) and four additional databases. In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched trials registers and reference lists, handsearched conference proceedings and contacted authors and equipment manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

This is the update of an existing review. In the previous version of this review we focused on the effects of tDCS on ADLs and function. In this update, we broadened our inclusion criteria to compare any kind of active tDCS for improving ADLs, function, muscle strength and cognitive abilities (including spatial neglect) versus any kind of placebo or control intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and risk of bias (JM and MP) and extracted data (BE and JM). If necessary, we contacted study authors to ask for additional information. We collected information on dropouts and adverse events from the trial reports.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies involving a total of 748 participants aged above 18 with acute, postacute or chronic ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke. We also identified 55 ongoing studies. The risk of bias did not differ substantially for different comparisons and outcomes.We found nine studies with 396 participants examining the effects of tDCS versus sham tDCS (or any other passive intervention) on our primary outcome measure, ADLs after stroke. We found evidence of effect regarding ADL performance at the end of the intervention period (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.44; inverse variance method with random-effects model; moderate quality evidence). Six studies with 269 participants assessed the effects of tDCS on ADLs at the end of follow-up, and found improved ADL performance (SMD 0.31, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.62; inverse variance method with random-effects model; moderate quality evidence). However, the results did not persist in a sensitivity analysis including only trials of good methodological quality.One of our secondary outcome measures was upper extremity function: 12 trials with a total of 431 participants measured upper extremity function at the end of the intervention period, revealing no evidence of an effect in favour of tDCS (SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.50 for studies presenting absolute values (low quality evidence) and SMD 0.32, 95% CI -0.51 to 1.15 (low quality evidence) for studies presenting change values; inverse variance method with random-effects model). Regarding the effects of tDCS on upper extremity function at the end of follow-up, we identified four studies with a total of 187 participants (absolute values) that showed no evidence of an effect (SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.50; inverse variance method with random-effects model; low quality evidence). Ten studies with 313 participants reported outcome data for muscle strength at the end of the intervention period, but in the corresponding meta-analysis there was no evidence of an effect. Three studies with 156 participants reported outcome data on muscle strength at follow-up, but there was no evidence of an effect.In six of 23 studies (26%), dropouts, adverse events or deaths that occurred during the intervention period were reported, and the proportions of dropouts and adverse events were comparable between groups (risk difference (RD) 0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; Mantel-Haenszel method with random-effects model; low quality evidence; analysis based only on studies that reported either on dropouts, or on adverse events, or on both). However, this effect may be underestimated due to reporting bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At the moment, evidence of very low to moderate quality is available on the effectiveness of tDCS (anodal/cathodal/dual) versus control (sham/any other intervention) for improving ADL performance after stroke. However, there are many ongoing randomised trials that could change the quality of evidence in the future. Future studies should particularly engage those who may benefit most from tDCS after stroke and in the effects of tDCS on upper and lower limb function, muscle strength and cognitive abilities (including spatial neglect). Dropouts and adverse events should be routinely monitored and presented as secondary outcomes. They should also address methodological issues by adhering to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement.

Opportunities for Guided Multichannel Non-invasive Transcranial Current Stimulation in Poststroke Rehabilitation

Stroke is a leading cause of serious long-term disability worldwide. Functional outcome depends on stroke location, severity, and early intervention. Conventional rehabilitation strategies have limited effectiveness, and new treatments still fail to keep pace, in part due to a lack of understanding of the different stages in brain recovery and the vast heterogeneity in the poststroke population. Innovative methodologies for restorative neurorehabilitation are required to reduce long-term disability and socioeconomic burden. Neuroplasticity is involved in poststroke functional disturbances and also during rehabilitation. Tackling poststroke neuroplasticity by non-invasive brain stimulation is regarded as promising, but efficacy might be limited because of rather uniform application across patients despite individual heterogeneity of lesions, symptoms, and other factors. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) induces and modulates neuroplasticity, and has been shown to be able to improve motor and cognitive functions. tDCS is suited to improve poststroke rehabilitation outcomes, but effect sizes are often moderate and suffer from variability. Indeed, the location, extent, and pattern of functional network connectivity disruption should be considered when determining the optimal location sites for tDCS therapies. Here, we present potential opportunities for neuroimaging-guided tDCS-based rehabilitation strategies after stroke that could be personalized. We introduce innovative multimodal intervention protocols based on multichannel tDCS montages, neuroimaging methods, and real-time closed-loop systems to guide therapy. This might help to overcome current treatment limitations in poststroke rehabilitation and increase our general understanding of adaptive neuroplasticity leading to neural reorganization after stroke.

Neurophysiological and behavioural effects of dual-hemisphere transcranial direct current stimulation on the proximal upper limb

Dual-hemisphere transcranial direct current stimulation over the primary motor cortex (M1-M1 tDCS) is assumed to modulate neural excitability in a polarity-dependent manner and improve motor performance of the hand. In the proximal upper limb, the neurophysiological and behavioural after-effects of M1-M1 tDCS are not well known. This study investigated the after-effects of M1-M1 tDCS on contralateral, ipsilateral and transcallosal excitability to the proximal upper limb muscle biceps brachii (BB). Circle tracing was used to assess motor performance before and after tDCS as this task requires coordination of proximal and distal musculature. Sixteen healthy right-handed adults participated in the study, each receiving M1-M1 tDCS (1 mA, 15 min) or sham tDCS in separate sessions. The anode was positioned over right M1 and cathode over left M1. M1-M1 tDCS suppressed transcallosal inhibition from the M1 under the cathode (P < 0.045). No other neurophysiologic or behavioural effects were observed (P > 0.6). The study provides important information regarding inconsistent neurophysiological and behavioural changes following tDCS that have implications for future tDCS research on the motor system.

Using clinical and robotic assessment tools to examine the feasibility of pairing tDCS with upper extremity physical therapy in patients with stroke and TBI: a consideration-of-concept pilot study

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may provide a safe, non-invasive technique for modulating neural excitability during neurorehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE

1) Assess feasibility and potential effectiveness of tDCS as an adjunct to standard upper extremity (UE) physical therapy (PT) for motor impairments resulting from neurological insult. 2) Determine sustainability of improvements over a six month period.

METHODS

Five participants with chronic neurologic insult (stroke or traumatic brain injury > 6 months prior) completed 24 sessions (40 minutes, three times/week) of UE-PT combined with bihemispheric tDCS delivered at 1.5 mA over the motor cortex during the first 15 minutes of each PT session. Outcomes were assessed using clinical (UE Fugl-Meyer, Purdue Pegboard, Box and Block, Stroke Impact Scale) and robotic (unimanual and bimanual motor control) measures. Change in scores and associated effects sizes from Pre-test to Post-test and a six month Follow-up were calculated for each participant and group as a whole.

RESULTS

Scores on UE Fugl-Meyer, Box and Block, Purdue Pegboard, Stroke Impact Scale, and robotic measures improved from Pre- to Post-test. Improvements on UE Fugl-Meyer, Box and Block, and robotic measures were largely sustained at six months.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining bihemispheric tDCS with UE-PT in individuals with neurological insult warrants further investigation.

Neural substrates underlying motor skill learning in chronic hemiparetic stroke patients

Motor skill learning is critical in post-stroke motor recovery, but little is known about its underlying neural substrates. Recently, using a new visuomotor skill learning paradigm involving a speed/accuracy trade-off in healthy individuals we identified three subpopulations based on their behavioral trajectories: fitters (in whom improvement in speed or accuracy coincided with deterioration in the other parameter), shifters (in whom speed and/or accuracy improved without degradation of the other parameter), and non-learners. We aimed to identify the neural substrates underlying the first stages of motor skill learning in chronic hemiparetic stroke patients and to determine whether specific neural substrates were recruited in shifters versus fitters. During functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), 23 patients learned the visuomotor skill with their paretic upper limb. In the whole-group analysis, correlation between activation and motor skill learning was restricted to the dorsal prefrontal cortex of the damaged hemisphere (DLPFC_damh: r = −0.82) and the dorsal premotor cortex (PMd_damh: r = 0.70); the correlations was much lesser (−0.16 < r > 0.25) in the other regions of interest. In a subgroup analysis, significant activation was restricted to bilateral posterior parietal cortices of the fitters and did not correlate with motor skill learning. Conversely, in shifters significant activation occurred in the primary sensorimotor cortex_damh and supplementary motor area_damh and in bilateral PMd where activation changes correlated significantly with motor skill learning (r = 0.91). Finally, resting-state activity acquired before learning showed a higher functional connectivity in the salience network of shifters compared with fitters (qFDR < 0.05). These data suggest a neuroplastic compensatory reorganization of brain activity underlying the first stages of motor skill learning with the paretic upper limb in chronic hemiparetic stroke patients, with a key role of bilateral PMd.

Non-invasive brain stimulation: an interventional tool for enhancing behavioral training after stroke

Stroke is the leading cause of disability among adults. Motor deficit is the most common impairment after stroke. Especially, deficits in fine motor skills impair numerous activities of daily life. Re-acquisition of motor skills resulting in improved or more accurate motor performance is paramount to regain function, and is the basis of behavioral motor therapy after stroke. Within the past years, there has been a rapid technological and methodological development in neuroimaging leading to a significant progress in the understanding of the neural substrates that underlie motor skill acquisition and functional recovery in stroke patients. Based on this and the development of novel non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques, new adjuvant interventional approaches that augment the response to behavioral training have been proposed. Transcranial direct current, transcranial magnetic, and paired associative (PAS) stimulation are NIBS techniques that can modulate cortical excitability, neuronal plasticity and interact with learning and memory in both healthy individuals and stroke patients. These techniques can enhance the effect of practice and facilitate the retention of tasks that mimic daily life activities. The purpose of the present review is to provide a comprehensive overview of neuroplastic phenomena in the motor system during learning of a motor skill, recovery after brain injury, and of interventional strategies to enhance the beneficial effects of customarily used neurorehabilitation after stroke.

Safety and feasibility of transcranial direct current stimulation in pediatric hemiparesis: randomized controlled preliminary study

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a form of noninvasive brain stimulation that has shown improved adult stroke outcomes. Applying tDCS in children with congenital hemiparesis has not yet been explored.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to explore the safety and feasibility of single-session tDCS through an adverse events profile and symptom assessment within a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled preliminary study in children with congenital hemiparesis. A secondary objective was to assess the stability of hand and cognitive function.

DESIGN

A double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled pretest/posttest/follow-up study was conducted.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a university pediatric research laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirteen children, ages 7 to 18 years, with congenital hemiparesis participated.

MEASUREMENTS

Adverse events/safety assessment and hand function were measured.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomly assigned to either an intervention group or a control group, with safety and functional assessments at pretest, at posttest on the same day, and at a 1-week follow-up session. An intervention of 10 minutes of 0.7 mA tDCS was applied to bilateral primary motor cortices. The tDCS intervention was considered safe if there was no individual decline of 25% or group decline of 2 standard deviations for motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and behavioral data and no report of adverse events.

RESULTS

No major adverse events were found, including no seizures. Two participants did not complete the study due to lack of MEP and discomfort. For the 11 participants who completed the study, group differences in MEPs and behavioral data did not exceed 2 standard deviations in those who received the tDCS (n=5) and those in the control group (n=6). The study was completed without the need for stopping per medical monitor and biostatisticial analysis.

LIMITATIONS

A limitation of the study was the small sample size, with data available for 11 participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this study, tDCS appears to be safe, feasible, and well tolerated in most children with hemiparesis. Future investigations of serial sessions of tDCS in conjunction with rehabilitation in pediatric hemiparesis are indicated to explore the benefit of a synergistic approach to improving hand function.

Reinforcement learning for adaptive threshold control of restorative brain-computer interfaces: a Bayesian simulation

Restorative brain-computer interfaces (BCI) are increasingly used to provide feedback of neuronal states in a bid to normalize pathological brain activity and achieve behavioral gains. However, patients and healthy subjects alike often show a large variability, or even inability, of brain self-regulation for BCI control, known as BCI illiteracy. Although current co-adaptive algorithms are powerful for assistive BCIs, their inherent class switching clashes with the operant conditioning goal of restorative BCIs. Moreover, due to the treatment rationale, the classifier of restorative BCIs usually has a constrained feature space, thus limiting the possibility of classifier adaptation. In this context, we applied a Bayesian model of neurofeedback and reinforcement learning for different threshold selection strategies to study the impact of threshold adaptation of a linear classifier on optimizing restorative BCIs. For each feedback iteration, we first determined the thresholds that result in minimal action entropy and maximal instructional efficiency. We then used the resulting vector for the simulation of continuous threshold adaptation. We could thus show that threshold adaptation can improve reinforcement learning, particularly in cases of BCI illiteracy. Finally, on the basis of information-theory, we provided an explanation for the achieved benefits of adaptive threshold setting.

Efficacy of semantic-phonological treatment combined with tDCS for verb retrieval in a patient with aphasia

Recent studies reported enhanced performance on language tasks induced by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in patients with aphasia. One chronic patient with non-fluent aphasia received 20 sessions of a verb anomia training combined with off-line bihemispheric tDCS applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) - anodal tDCS over left DLPFC plus cathodal tDCS over right DLPFC. A significant improvement in verb naming was observed at all testing times (4, 12, 24, and 48 weeks from post-entry/baseline testing) for treated and untreated verbs. Our findings show beneficial effects of verb anomia training in combination with tDCS in chronic aphasic patient, suggesting a long-lasting effect of this treatment.

Brain-machine interface (BMI) in paralysis

INTRODUCTION

Brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) use brain activity to control external devices, facilitating paralyzed patients to interact with the environment. In this review, we focus on the current advances of non-invasive BMIs for communication in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and for restoration of motor impairment after severe stroke.

BMI FOR ALS PATIENTS

BMI represents a promising strategy to establish communication with paralyzed ALS patients as it does not need muscle engagement for its use. Distinct techniques have been explored to assess brain neurophysiology to control BMI for patients' communication, especially electroencephalography (EEG) and more recently near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). Previous studies demonstrated successful communication with ALS patients using EEG-BMI when patients still showed residual eye control, but patients with complete paralysis were unable to communicate with this system. We recently introduced functional NIRS (fNIRS)-BMI for communication in ALS patients in the complete locked-in syndrome (i.e., when ALS patients are unable to engage any muscle), opening new doors for communication in ALS patients after complete paralysis.

BMI FOR STROKE MOTOR RECOVERY

In addition to assisted communication, BMI is also being extensively studied for motor recovery after stroke. BMI for stroke motor recovery includes intensive BMI training linking brain activity related to patient's intention to move the paretic limb with the contingent sensory feedback of the paretic limb movement guided by assistive devices. BMI studies in this area are mainly focused on EEG- or magnetoencephalography (MEG)-BMI systems due to their high temporal resolution, which facilitates online contingency between intention to move and sensory feedback of the intended movement. EEG-BMI training was recently demonstrated in a controlled study to significantly improve motor performance in stroke patients with severe paresis. Neural basis for BMI-induced restoration of motor function and perspectives for future BMI research for stroke motor recovery are discussed.

Anodal tDCS Combined With Radial Nerve Stimulation Promotes Hand Motor Recovery in the Acute Phase After Ischemic Stroke

Background and Objective. The question of the best therapeutic window in which noninvasive brain stimulation (NIBS) could potentiate the plastic changes for motor recovery after a stroke is still unresolved. Most of the previous NIBS studies included patients in the chronic phase of recovery and very few in the subacute or acute phase. We investigated the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with repetitive peripheral nerve stimulation (rPNS) on the time course of motor recovery in the acute phase after a stroke. Methods. Twenty patients enrolled within the first few days after a stroke were randomized in 2 parallel groups: one receiving 5 consecutive daily sessions of anodal tDCS over the ipsilesional motor cortex in association with rPNS and the other receiving the same rPNS combined with sham tDCS. Motor performance (primary endpoint: Jebsen and Taylor Hand Function Test [JHFT]) and transcranial magnetic stimulation cortical excitability measures were obtained at baseline (D1), at the end of the treatment (D5), and at 2 and 4 weeks’ follow-up (D15 and D30). Results. The time course of motor recovery of the 2 groups of patients was different and positively influenced by the intervention (Group × Time interaction P = .01). The amount of improvement on the JHFT was greater at D15 and D30 in the anodal tDCS group than in the sham group. Conclusion. These results show that early cortical neuromodulation with anodal tDCS combined with rPNS can promote motor hand recovery and that the benefit is still present 1 month after the stroke.

Neural substrates underlying stimulation-enhanced motor skill learning after stroke

Motor skill learning is one of the key components of motor function recovery after stroke, especially recovery driven by neurorehabilitation. Transcranial direct current stimulation can enhance neurorehabilitation and motor skill learning in stroke patients. However, the neural mechanisms underlying the retention of stimulation-enhanced motor skill learning involving a paretic upper limb have not been resolved. These neural substrates were explored by means of functional magnetic resonance imaging. Nineteen chronic hemiparetic stroke patients participated in a double-blind, cross-over randomized, sham-controlled experiment with two series. Each series consisted of two sessions: (i) an intervention session during which dual transcranial direct current stimulation or sham was applied during motor skill learning with the paretic upper limb; and (ii) an imaging session 1 week later, during which the patients performed the learned motor skill. The motor skill learning task, called the 'circuit game', involves a speed/accuracy trade-off and consists of moving a pointer controlled by a computer mouse along a complex circuit as quickly and accurately as possible. Relative to the sham series, dual transcranial direct current stimulation applied bilaterally over the primary motor cortex during motor skill learning with the paretic upper limb resulted in (i) enhanced online motor skill learning; (ii) enhanced 1-week retention; and (iii) superior transfer of performance improvement to an untrained task. The 1-week retention's enhancement driven by the intervention was associated with a trend towards normalization of the brain activation pattern during performance of the learned motor skill relative to the sham series. A similar trend towards normalization relative to sham was observed during performance of a simple, untrained task without a speed/accuracy constraint, despite a lack of behavioural difference between the dual transcranial direct current stimulation and sham series. Finally, dual transcranial direct current stimulation applied during the first session enhanced continued learning with the paretic limb 1 week later, relative to the sham series. This lasting behavioural enhancement was associated with more efficient recruitment of the motor skill learning network, that is, focused activation on the motor-premotor areas in the damaged hemisphere, especially on the dorsal premotor cortex. Dual transcranial direct current stimulation applied during motor skill learning with a paretic upper limb resulted in prolonged shaping of brain activation, which supported behavioural enhancements in stroke patients.

Electrifying the motor engram: effects of tDCS on motor learning and control

Learning to control our movements is accompanied by neuroplasticity of motor areas of the brain. The mechanisms of neuroplasticity are diverse and produce what is referred to as the motor engram, i.e., the neural trace of the motor memory. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) alters the neural and behavioral correlates of motor learning, but its precise influence on the motor engram is unknown. In this review, we summarize the effects of tDCS on neural activity and suggest a few key principles: (1) Firing rates are increased by anodal polarization and decreased by cathodal polarization, (2) anodal polarization strengthens newly formed associations, and (3) polarization modulates the memory of new/preferred firing patterns. With these principles in mind, we review the effects of tDCS on motor control, motor learning, and clinical applications. The increased spontaneous and evoked firing rates may account for the modulation of dexterity in non-learning tasks by tDCS. The facilitation of new association may account for the effect of tDCS on learning in sequence tasks while the ability of tDCS to strengthen memories of new firing patterns may underlie the effect of tDCS on consolidation of skills. We then describe the mechanisms of neuroplasticity of motor cortical areas and how they might be influenced by tDCS. We end with current challenges for the fields of brain stimulation and motor learning.

Pediatric stroke and transcranial direct current stimulation: methods for rational individualized dose optimization

BACKGROUND

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been investigated mainly in adults and doses may not be appropriate in pediatric applications. In perinatal stroke where potential applications are promising, rational adaptation of dosage for children remains under investigation.

OBJECTIVE

Construct child-specific tDCS dosing parameters through case study within a perinatal stroke tDCS safety and feasibility trial.

METHODS

10-year-old subject with a diagnosis of presumed perinatal ischemic stroke and hemiparesis was identified. T1 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans used to derive computerized model for current flow and electrode positions. Workflow using modeling results and consideration of dosage in previous clinical trials was incorporated. Prior ad hoc adult montages vs. de novo optimized montages provided distinct risk benefit analysis. Approximating adult dose required consideration of changes in both peak brain current flow and distribution which further tradeoff between maximizing efficacy and adding safety factors. Electrode size, position, current intensity, compliance voltage, and duration were controlled independently in this process.

RESULTS

Brain electric fields modeled and compared to values previously predicted models (Datta et al., 2011; Minhas et al., 2012). Approximating conservative brain current flow patterns and intensities used in previous adult trials for comparable indications, the optimal current intensity established was 0.7 mA for 10 min with a tDCS C3/C4 montage. Specifically 0.7 mA produced comparable peak brain current intensity of an average adult receiving 1.0 mA. Electrode size of 5 × 7 cm(2) with 1.0 mA and low-voltage tDCS was employed to maximize tolerability. Safety and feasibility confirmed with subject tolerating the session well and no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Rational approaches to dose customization, with steps informed by computational modeling, may improve guidance for pediatric stroke tDCS trials.

Broca's area damage is necessary but not sufficient to induce after-effects of cathodal tDCS on the unaffected hemisphere in post-stroke aphasia

BACKGROUND

The inter-individual variability of behavioral effects after tDCS applied to the unaffected right hemisphere in stroke may be related to factors such as the lesion location.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

We investigated the effect of left Broca's area (BA) damage on picture naming in aphasic patients after cathodal tDCS applied over the right BA.

METHODS

We conducted a study using pre-interventional diffusion and resting state functional MRI (rsfMRI) and two cross-over tDCS sessions (TYPE: sham and cathodal) over the right homologous BA in aphasic stroke patients with ischemic lesions involving the left BA (BA+) or other left brain areas (BA-). Picture naming accuracy was assessed after each session. Inter-hemispheric (IH) functional balance was investigated via rsfMRI connectivity maps using the right BA as a seed. Probabilistic tractography was used to study the integrity of language white matter pathways.

RESULTS

tDCS had different effects on picture naming accuracy in BA+ and BA- patients (TYPE × GROUP interaction, F(1,19): 4.6, P: 0.04). All BA- patients except one did not respond to tDCS and demonstrated normal IH balance between the right and left BA when compared to healthy subjects. BA+ patients were improved by tDCS in 36% and had decreased level of functional IH balance. Improvement in picture naming after cathodal tDCS was associated with the integrity of the arcuate fasciculus in BA+ patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioral effects of cathodal tDCS on the unaffected right hemisphere differ depending on whether BA and the arcuate fasciculus are damaged. Therefore, IH imbalance could be a direct consequence of anatomical lesions.

Enhanced motor learning following task-concurrent dual transcranial direct current stimulation

OBJECTIVE

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the primary motor cortex (M1) has beneficial effects on motor performance and motor learning in healthy subjects and is emerging as a promising tool for motor neurorehabilitation. Applying tDCS concurrently with a motor task has recently been found to be more effective than applying stimulation before the motor task. This study extends this finding to examine whether such task-concurrent stimulation further enhances motor learning on a dual M1 montage.

METHOD

Twenty healthy, right-handed subjects received anodal tDCS to the right M1, dual tDCS (anodal current over right M1 and cathodal over left M1) and sham tDCS in a repeated-measures design. Stimulation was applied for 10 mins at 1.5 mA during an explicit motor learning task. Response times (RT) and accuracy were measured at baseline, during, directly after and 15 mins after stimulation. Motor cortical excitability was recorded from both hemispheres before and after stimulation using single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation.

RESULTS

Task-concurrent stimulation with a dual M1 montage significantly reduced RTs by 23% as early as with the onset of stimulation (p<0.01) with this effect increasing to 30% at the final measurement. Polarity-specific changes in cortical excitability were observed with MEPs significantly reduced by 12% in the left M1 and increased by 69% in the right M1.

CONCLUSION

Performance improvement occurred earliest in the dual M1 condition with a stable and lasting effect. Unilateral anodal stimulation resulted only in trendwise improvement when compared to sham. Therefore, task-concurrent dual M1 stimulation is most suited for obtaining the desired neuromodulatory effects of tDCS in explicit motor learning.

Formation of cortical plasticity in older adults following tDCS and motor training

Neurodegeneration accompanies the process of natural aging, reducing the ability to perform functional daily activities. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) alters neuronal excitability and motor performance; however its beneficial effect on the induction of primary motor cortex (M1) plasticity in older adults is unclear. Moreover, little is known as to whether the tDCS electrode arrangement differentially affects M1 plasticity and motor performance in this population. In a double-blinded, cross-over trial, we compared unilateral, bilateral and sham tDCS combined with visuomotor tracking, on M1 plasticity and motor performance of the non-dominant upper limb, immediately post and 30 min following stimulation. We found (a) unilateral and bilateral tDCS decreased tracking error by 12–22% at both time points; with sham decreasing tracking error by 10% at 30 min only, (b) at both time points, motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were facilitated (38–54%) and short-interval intracortical inhibition was released (21–36%) for unilateral and bilateral conditions relative to sham, (c) there were no differences between unilateral and bilateral conditions for any measure. These findings suggest that tDCS modulated elements of M1 plasticity, which improved motor performance irrespective of the electrode arrangement. The results provide preliminary evidence indicating that tDCS is a safe non-invasive tool to preserve or improve neurological function and motor control in older adults.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for improving function and activities of daily living in patients after stroke

BACKGROUND

Stroke is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Functional impairment resulting in poor performance in activities of daily living (ADLs) among stroke survivors is common. Current rehabilitation approaches have limited effectiveness in improving ADL performance and function after stroke, but a possible adjunct to stroke rehabilitation might be non-invasive brain stimulation by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to modulate cortical excitability and hence to improve ADL performance and function.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of tDCS on generic activities of daily living (ADLs) and motor function in people with stroke.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (March 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, May 2013), MEDLINE (1948 to May 2013), EMBASE (1980 to May 2013), CINAHL (1982 to May 2013), AMED (1985 to May 2013), Science Citation Index (1899 to May 2013) and four additional databases. In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched trials registers and reference lists, handsearched conference proceedings and contacted authors and equipment manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and randomised controlled cross-over trials (from which we analysed only the first period as a parallel-group design) that compared tDCS versus control in adults with stroke for improving ADL performance and function.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality (JM and MP) and extracted data (BE and JM). If necessary, we contacted study authors to ask for additional information. We collected information on dropouts and adverse events from the trial reports.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies involving a total of 455 participants. Analysis of six studies involving 326 participants regarding our primary outcome, ADL, showed no evidence of an effect in favour of tDCS at the end of the intervention phase (mean difference (MD) 5.31 Barthel Index (BI) points; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.52 to 11.14; inverse variance method with random-effects model), whereas at follow-up (MD 11.13 BI points; 95% CI 2.89 to 19.37; inverse variance method with random-effects model), we found evidence of an effect. However, the confidence intervals were wide and the effect was not sustained when only studies with low risk of bias were included. For our secondary outcome, upper limb function, we analysed eight trials with 358 participants, which showed evidence of an effect in favour of tDCS at the end of the intervention phase (MD 3.45 Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer Score points (UE-FM points); 95% CI 1.24 to 5.67; inverse variance method with random-effects model) but not at the end of follow-up three months after the intervention (MD 9.23 UE-FM points; 95% CI -13.47 to 31.94; inverse variance method with random-effects model). These results were sensitive to inclusion of studies at high risk of bias. Adverse events were reported and the proportions of dropouts and adverse events were comparable between groups (risk difference (RD) 0.00; 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; Mantel-Haenszel method with random-effects model).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At the moment, evidence of very low to low quality is available on the effectiveness of tDCS (anodal/cathodal/dual) versus control (sham/any other intervention) for improving ADL performance and function after stroke. Future research should investigate the effects of tDCS on lower limb function and should address methodological issues by routinely reporting data on adverse events and dropouts and allocation concealment, and by performing intention-to-treat analyses.

Effectiveness and neural mechanisms associated with tDCS delivered to premotor cortex in stroke rehabilitation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

More than 60% of stroke survivors experience residual deficits of the paretic upper limb/hand. Standard rehabilitation generates modest gains. Stimulation delivered to the surviving Primary Motor Cortex in the stroke-affected hemisphere has been considered a promising adjunct. However, recent trials challenge its advantage. We discuss our pilot clinical trial that aims to address factors implicated in divergent success of the approach. We assess safety, feasibility and efficacy of targeting an alternate locus during rehabilitation- the premotor cortex. In anticipating variance across patients, we measure neural markers differentiating response from non-response.

METHODS/DESIGN

In a randomized, sham-controlled, double-blinded pilot clinical study, patients with chronic stroke (n = 20) are assigned to receive transcranial direct current stimulation delivered to the premotor cortex or sham during rehabilitation of the paretic arm/hand. Patients receive the designated intervention for 30 min, twice a day for 3 days a week for 5 weeks. We assess hand function and patients' reports of use of paretic hand. A general linear mixed methods model will analyze changes from pre- to post-intervention. Responders and non-responders will be compared upon baseline level of function, and neural substrates, including function and integrity of output tracts, bi-hemispheric balance, and lesion profile. Incidence of adverse events will be compared using Fisher's Exact test, while rigor of blinding will be assessed with Chi-square analysis to ascertain feasibility.

DISCUSSION

Variable success of cortical stimulation in rehabilitation can be related to gaps in theoretical basis and clinical investigation. Given that most patients with severe deficits have damage to the primary motor cortex or its output pathways, it would be futile to target stimulation to this site. We suggest targeting premotor cortex because it contributes substantially to descending output, a role that is amplified with greater damage to the motor cortex. With regards to clinical investigation, paired cortical stimulation in rehabilitation has been compared to rehabilitation alone in unblinded trials or to unconvincing sham conditions. Transcranial direct current stimulation, a noninvasive technique of brain stimulation, which offers a more effective placebo and has a favorable safety-feasibility profile, may improve scientific rigor. Neural markers of response would help inform patient selection for future clinical trials so we can address limitations of recent negative studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01539096.

Concurrent TMS to the primary motor cortex augments slow motor learning

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has shown promise as a treatment tool, with one FDA approved use. While TMS alone is able to up- (or down-) regulate a targeted neural system, we argue that TMS applied as an adjuvant is more effective for repetitive physical, behavioral and cognitive therapies, that is, therapies which are designed to alter the network properties of neural systems through Hebbian learning. We tested this hypothesis in the context of a slow motor learning paradigm. Healthy right-handed individuals were assigned to receive 5 Hz TMS (TMS group) or sham TMS (sham group) to the right primary motor cortex (M1) as they performed daily motor practice of a digit sequence task with their non-dominant hand for 4 weeks. Resting cerebral blood flow (CBF) was measured by H2(15)O PET at baseline and after 4 weeks of practice. Sequence performance was measured daily as the number of correct sequences performed, and modeled using a hyperbolic function. Sequence performance increased significantly at 4 weeks relative to baseline in both groups. The TMS group had a significant additional improvement in performance, specifically, in the rate of skill acquisition. In both groups, an improvement in sequence timing and transfer of skills to non-trained motor domains was also found. Compared to the sham group, the TMS group demonstrated increases in resting CBF specifically in regions known to mediate skill learning namely, the M1, cingulate cortex, putamen, hippocampus, and cerebellum. These results indicate that TMS applied concomitantly augments behavioral effects of motor practice, with corresponding neural plasticity in motor sequence learning network. These findings are the first demonstration of the behavioral and neural enhancing effects of TMS on slow motor practice and have direct application in neurorehabilitation where TMS could be applied in conjunction with physical therapy.

Induction of cortical plasticity and improved motor performance following unilateral and bilateral transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cortex

Background

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive technique that modulates the excitability of neurons within the primary motor cortex (M1). Research shows that anodal-tDCS applied over the non-dominant M1 (i.e. unilateral stimulation) improves motor function of the non-dominant hand. Similarly, previous studies also show that applying cathodal tDCS over the dominant M1 improves motor function of the non-dominant hand, presumably by reducing interhemispheric inhibition. In the present study, one condition involved anodal-tDCS over the non-dominant M1 (unilateral stimulation) whilst a second condition involved applying cathodal-tDCS over the dominant M1 and anodal-tDCS over non-dominant M1 (bilateral stimulation) to determine if unilateral or bilateral stimulation differentially modulates motor function of the non-dominant hand. Using a randomized, cross-over design, 11 right-handed participants underwent three stimulation conditions: 1) unilateral stimulation, that involved anodal-tDCS applied over the non-dominant M1, 2) bilateral stimulation, whereby anodal-tDCS was applied over the non-dominant M1, and cathodal-tDCS over the dominant M1, and 3) sham stimulation. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was performed before, immediately after, 30 and 60 minutes after stimulation to elucidate the neural mechanisms underlying any potential after-effects on motor performance. Motor function was evaluated by the Purdue pegboard test.

Results

There were significant improvements in motor function following unilateral and bilateral stimulation when compared to sham stimulation at all-time points (all P < 0.05); however there was no difference across time points between unilateral and bilateral stimulation. There was also a similar significant increase in corticomotor excitability with both unilateral and bilateral stimulation immediately post, 30 minutes and 60 minutes compared to sham stimulation (all P < 0.05). Unilateral and bilateral stimulation reduced short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) immediately post and at 30 minutes (all P < 0.05), but returned to baseline in both conditions at 60 minutes. There was no difference between unilateral and bilateral stimulation for SICI (P > 0.05). Furthermore, changes in corticomotor plasticity were not related to changes in motor performance.

Conclusion

These results indicate that tDCS induced behavioural changes in the non-dominant hand as a consequence of mechanisms associated with use-dependant cortical plasticity that is independent of the electrode arrangement.

Predicting behavioural response to TDCS in chronic motor stroke

Transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) of primary motor cortex (M1) can transiently improve paretic hand function in chronic stroke. However, responses are variable so there is incentive to try to improve efficacy and or to predict response in individual patients. Both excitatory (Anodal) stimulation of ipsilesional M1 and inhibitory (Cathodal) stimulation of contralesional M1 can speed simple reaction time. Here we tested whether combining these two effects simultaneously, by using a bilateral M1–M1 electrode montage, would improve efficacy. We tested the physiological efficacy of Bilateral, Anodal or Cathodal TDCS in changing motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in the healthy brain and their behavioural efficacy in changing reaction times with the paretic hand in chronic stroke. In addition, we aimed to identify clinical or neurochemical predictors of patients' behavioural response to TDCS. There were three main findings: 1) unlike Anodal and Cathodal TDCS, Bilateral M1–M1 TDCS (1 mA, 20 min) had no significant effect on MEPs in the healthy brain or on reaction time with the paretic hand in chronic stroke patients; 2) GABA levels in ipsilesional M1 predicted patients' behavioural gains from Anodal TDCS; and 3) although patients were in the chronic phase, time since stroke (and its combination with Fugl–Meyer score) was a positive predictor of behavioural gain from Cathodal TDCS. These findings indicate the superiority of Anodal or Cathodal over Bilateral TDCS in changing motor cortico-spinal excitability in the healthy brain and in speeding reaction time in chronic stroke. The identified clinical and neurochemical markers of behavioural response should help to inform the optimization of TDCS delivery and to predict patient outcome variability in future TDCS intervention studies in chronic motor stroke.

•

Ipsilesional M1 GABA levels predict motor gains from Anodal TDCS in chronic stroke.

•

Time since stroke and Fugl–Meyer score jointly predict response to Cathodal TDCS.

•

Bilateral motor cortex TDCS did not reliably change motor evoked potentials.

•

Bilateral motor cortex TDCS did not reliably change manual reaction time.

A Comparison between Uni- and Bilateral tDCS Effects on Functional Connectivity of the Human Motor Cortex

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) has been shown to induce changes in motor performance and learning. Recent studies indicate that tDCS is capable of modulating widespread neural network properties within the brain. However the temporal evolution of online- and after-effects of tDCS on functional connectivity (FC) within and across the stimulated motor cortices (M1) still remain elusive. In the present study, two different tDCS setups were investigated: (i) unilateral M1 tDCS (anode over right M1, cathode over the contralateral supraorbital region) and (ii) bilateral M1 tDCS (anode over right M1, cathode over left M1). In a randomized single-blinded cross-over design, 12 healthy subjects underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging at rest before, during and after 20 min of either bi-, unilateral, or sham M1 tDCS. Seed-based FC analysis was used to investigate tDCS-induced changes across and within M1. We found that bilateral M1 tDCS induced (a) a decrease in interhemispheric FC during stimulation and (b) an increase in intracortical FC within right M1 after termination of the intervention. While unilateral M1 tDCS also resulted in similar effects during stimulation, no such changes could be observed after termination of tDCS. Our results provide evidence that depending on the electrode montage, tDCS acts upon a modulation of either intracortical and/or interhemispheric processing of M1.