Low-level intermittent quadriceps activity during transcranial direct current stimulation facilitates knee extensor force-generating capacity

No Evidence of Hysteresis in Quadriceps or Hamstring Active Motor Evoked Potentials

BackgroundThe excitability of the corticospinal tract (i.e., corticospinal excitability) is a valuable tool for assessing neurophysiology and the effectiveness of interventions in individuals with and without neurological and/or orthopaedic injuries. Corticospinal excitability is often measured with an input-output recruitment curve, which is produced by stimulating the motor cortex via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) at several intensities and measuring the changes in the evoked responses. However, it is currently unclear if hysteresis in motor evoked potentials (MEPs) (i.e., changes in MEP amplitude due to the order of stimulus intensities) affects the resulting measure of excitability, particularly in lower extremity muscles.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether the order of stimulus intensity (ascending, descending, randomized) affects input-output recruitment curves measured in the lower extremity muscles.MethodsRecruitment curves were produced in neurologically intact individuals by stimulating the primary motor cortex at 70% to 140% of active motor threshold in 10% increments. We examined three stimulus intensity ordering paradigms: ascending (70→ 140), descending (140→ 70), and randomized. We measured MEPs of the quadriceps and the antagonistic hamstring muscles using surface electromyography in addition to quadriceps motor evoked torque. We computed the area under the recruitment curve (AUC) of the raw and normalized motor evoked responses and used classical and Bayesian inference methods to comprehensively evaluate hysteresis in MEPs.ResultsClassical hypothesis testing revealed no significant main effects of stimulus order. Bayesian analyses also confirmed that the null model was more favored than the main effects model.ConclusionsCorticospinal excitability of the quadriceps and antagonistic hamstring muscles were not influenced by stimulus intensity order. Any of the three approaches (ascending, descending, randomized) may be used when measuring recruitment curves for the quadriceps and hamstring muscles.

Acute effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on endurance and maximal voluntary contraction in lower limbs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To examine the effects of single-dose anodal tDCS on isometric maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) and isometric endurance performance in lower limb exercises with healthy adults.

METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL for studies published between database inception and June 11, 2024. All randomized controlled trials on anodal tDCS interventions for MVC and isometric endurance in lower limb exercises were included, with no date restrictions. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the Jadad Scale, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The Open Science Framework registered the protocol in June 2024 (DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AG93M ).

RESULTS

20 interventions were included, comprising 15 for MVC and 5 for 'Time to Task Failure' (TTF), which refers to isometric endurance performance measured in seconds. The findings showed no difference in the MVC (SMD = 0.06; 95% CI = - 0.14, 0.25; P = 0.57) and TTF performance (WMD = 0.07; 95% CI = - 0.26, 0.40; P = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

The current meta-analysis indicated that anodal tDCS did not increase isometric MVC and isometric endurance performance in lower limb exercises in healthy adults.

Simulating tDCS electrode placement to stimulate both M1 and SMA enhances motor performance and modulates cortical excitability depending on current flow direction

Introduction

The conventional method of placing transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) electrodes is just above the target brain area. However, this strategy for electrode placement often fails to improve motor function and modulate cortical excitability. We investigated the effects of optimized electrode placement to induce maximum electrical fields in the leg regions of both M1 and SMA, estimated by electric field simulations in the T1and T2-weighted MRI-based anatomical models, on motor performance and cortical excitability in healthy individuals.

Methods

A total of 36 healthy volunteers participated in this randomized, triple-blind, sham-controlled experiment. They were stratified by sex and were randomly assigned to one of three groups according to the stimulation paradigm, including tDCS with (1) anodal and cathodal electrodes positioned over FCz and POz, respectively, (A-P tDCS), (2) anodal and cathodal electrodes positioned over POz and FCz, respectively, (P-A tDCS), and (3) sham tDCS. The sit-to-stand training following tDCS (2 mA, 10 min) was conducted every 3 or 4 days over 3 weeks (5 sessions total).

Results

Compared to sham tDCS, A-P tDCS led to significant increases in the number of sit-to-stands after 3 weeks training, whereas P-A tDCS significantly increased knee flexor peak torques after 3 weeks training, and decreased short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) immediately after the first session of training and maintained it post-training.

Discussion

These results suggest that optimized electrode placement of the maximal EF estimated by electric field simulation enhances motor performance and modulates cortical excitability depending on the direction of current flow.

Acute effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on peak torque and 5000 m running performance: a randomized controlled trial

The benefits of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on brain function, cognitive response, and motor ability are well described in scientific literature. Nevertheless, the effects of tDCS on athletes' performance remain unclear. To compare the acute effects of tDCS on the running performance of 5000 m (m) runners. Eighteen athletes were randomized into Anodal (n = 9) groups that received tDCS for 20 min and 2 mA, and Sham (n = 9), in the motor cortex region (M1). Running time in 5000 m, speed, perceived exertion (RPE), internal load and peak torque (Pt) were evaluated. The Shapiro-Wilk test followed by a paired Student's t-test was used to compare Pt and total time to complete the run between the groups. The running time and speed of the Anodal group (p = 0.02; 95% CI 0.11-2.32; d = 1.24) was lower than the Sham group (p = 0.02, 95% CI 0.05-2.20; d = 1.15). However, no difference was found in Pt (p = 0.70; 95% CI - 0.75 to 1.11; d = 0.18), RPE (p = 0.23; 95% CI - 1.55 to 0.39; d = 0.60) and internal charge (p = 0.73; 95% CI - 0.77 to 1.09; d = 0.17). Our data indicate that tDCS can acutely optimize the time and speed of 5000 m runners. However, no alterations were found for Pt and RPE.

Priming Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on the Effects of Conventional Physiotherapy on Balance and Muscle Performance in Athletes With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury

CONTEXT

In athletes, postural control impairment and knee muscle dysfunction are the most common disorders following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Because of functional changes in the motor cortex following ACL injury, physiotherapy (PT) is not enough for treatment and using neuromodulators, such as trans-cranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may be necessary. The present study focused on the effects of anodal tDCS (a-tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) concurrent with PT on postural control and muscular performance in the athletes with ACL injury.

DESIGN

In this study, 34 athletes with ACL injury were randomly assigned in 2 groups of intervention group (active M1 a-tDCS concurrent with PT, n = 16) and control group (sham M1 a-tDCS concurrent with PT, n = 16).

METHODS

The participants of all groups received 20-minute 2 mA M1 a-tDCS with PT during 10 sessions, while tDCS was turned off after 30 seconds in the sham group. Before, immediately following, and 1 month after the interventions, the center of pressure and the average of power of flexor and extensor muscles at 2 velocities of 30°/s and 60°/s were measured by force plate and isokinetic devices, respectively.

RESULTS

One month after treatment, the displacement of center of pressure was decreased in the intervention group (P < .05), while there were no changes in the control group. Y-axis of center of pressure decreased in the intervention group relative to the control group, although average of power of flexor and extensor muscles increased immediately in both groups, but the rise in the intervention group was larger than that in the control group (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

The findings indicated that M1 a-tDCS can induce the efficacy of PT, which has a lasting effect on the improvement of the postural control in athletes with ACL injury.

Reduced isometric knee extensor force following anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the ipsilateral motor cortex

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study was to determine if 10-min of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) to the motor cortex (M1) is capable of modulating quadriceps isometric maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force or fatigue endurance contralateral or ipsilateral to the stimulation site.

METHODS

In a randomized, cross-over design, 16 (8 females) individuals underwent two sessions of a-tDCS and two sham tDCS (s-tDCS) sessions targeting the left M1 (all participants were right limb dominant), with testing of either the left (ipsilateral) or right (contralateral) quadriceps. Knee extensor (KE) MVC force was recorded prior to and following the a-tDCS and s-tDCS protocols. Additionally, a repetitive MVC fatiguing protocol (12 MVCs with work-rest ratio of 5:10-s) was completed following each tDCS protocol.

RESULTS

There was a significant interaction effect for stimulation condition x leg tested x time [F(1,60) = 7.156, p = 0.010, ηp2 = 0.11], which revealed a significant absolute KE MVC force reduction in the contralateral leg following s-tDCS (p < 0.001, d = 1.2) and in the ipsilateral leg following a-tDCS (p < 0.001, d = 1.09). A significant interaction effect for condition x leg tested [F(1,56) = 8.12, p = 0.006, ηp2 = 0.13], showed a significantly lower ipsilateral quadriceps (to tDCS) relative MVC force with a-tDCS, versus s-tDCS [t(15) = -3.07, p = 0.016, d = -0.77]. There was no significant difference between the relative contralateral quadriceps (to tDCS) MVC force for a-tDCS and s-tDCS. Although there was an overall significant [F(1,56) = 8.36, p < 0.001] 12.1% force decrease between the first and twelfth MVC repetitions, there were no significant main or interaction effects for fatigue index force.

CONCLUSION

a-tDCS may be ineffective at increasing maximal force or endurance and instead may be detrimental to quadriceps force production.

The influence of a single transcranial direct current stimulation session on physical fitness in healthy subjects: a systematic review

Physical fitness is of indisputable importance for both health, and sports. Currently, the brain is being increasingly recognized as a contributor to physical fitness. Hereby, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), as an ergogenic aid, has gained scientific interest. The current PRISMA-adherent review aimed to examine the effect of tDCS on the three core components of physical fitness: muscle strength, -endurance and cardiopulmonary endurance. Randomized controlled- or cross-over trials evaluating the effect of a single tDCS session (vs. sham) in healthy individuals were included. Hereby, a wide array of tDCS-related factors (e.g., tDCS montage and dose) was taken into account. Thirty-five studies (540 participants) were included. Between-study heterogeneity in factors such as age, activity level, tDCS protocol, and outcome measures was large. The capacity of tDCS to improve physical fitness varied substantially across studies. Nevertheless, muscle endurance was most susceptible to improvements following anodal tDCS (AtDCS), with 69% of studies (n = 11) investigating this core component of physical fitness reporting positive effects. The primary motor cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex were targeted the most, with positive results being reported on muscle and cardiopulmonary endurance. Finally, online tDCS seemed most beneficial, and no clear relationship between tDCS and dose-related parameters seemed present. These findings can contribute to optimizing tDCS interventions during the rehabilitation of patients with a variety of (chronic) diseases such as cardiovascular disease. Therefore, future studies should focus on further unraveling the potential of AtDCS on physical fitness and, more specifically, muscle endurance in both healthy subjects and patients suffering from (chronic) diseases. This study was registered in Prospero with the registration number CRD42021258529. "To enable PROSPERO to focus on COVID-19 registrations during the 2020 pandemic, this registration record was automatically published exactly as submitted. The PROSPERO team has not checked eligibility".

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Enhances Muscle Strength of Non-dominant Knee in Healthy Young Males

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been applied in training and competition, but its effects on physical performance remain largely unknown. This study aimed to observe the effect of tDCS on muscular strength and knee activation. Nineteen healthy young men were subjected to 20 min of real stimulation (2 mA) and sham stimulation (0 mA) over the primary motor cortex (M1) bilaterally on different days. The maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) of the knee extensors and flexors, and surface electromyography (sEMG) of the rectus femoris (RF) and biceps femoris (BF) were recorded before, immediately after, and 30 min after stimulation. MVC, rate of force development (RFD), and sEMG activity were analyzed before and after each condition. MVC of the non-dominant leg extensor and flexor was significantly higher immediately after real stimulation and 30 min after stimulation than before, and MVC of the non-dominant leg flexor was significantly higher 30 min after real stimulation than that after sham stimulation (P < 0.05). The RFD of the non-dominant leg extensor and flexor immediately after real stimulation was significantly higher than before stimulation, and the RFD of the non-dominant leg extensor immediately after real stimulation and 30 min after stimulation was significantly higher than that of sham stimulation (P < 0.05). EMG analysis showed the root mean square amplitude and mean power frequency (MPF) of the non-dominant BF and RF were significantly higher immediately after real stimulation and 30 min after stimulation than before stimulation, and the MPF of the non-dominant BF EMG was significantly higher 30 min after real stimulation than that after sham stimulation (P < 0.05). Bilateral tDCS of the M1 can significantly improve the muscle strength and explosive force of the non-dominant knee extensor and flexor, which might result from increased recruitment of motor units. This effect can last until 30 min after stimulation, but there is no significant effect on the dominant knee.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and sporting performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis of tDCS effects on physical endurance, muscular strength, and visuomotor skills

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that has been linked with a range of physiological and cognitive enhancements relevant to sporting performance. As a number of positive and null findings have been reported in the literature, the present meta-analysis sought to synthesise results across endurance, strength, and visuomotor skill domains to investigate if tDCS improves any aspect of sporting performance. Online database searches in August 2020 identified 43 full-text studies which examined the acute effects of tDCS compared to sham/control conditions on physical endurance, muscular strength, and visuomotor skills in healthy adults. Meta-analysis indicated a small overall effect favouring tDCS stimulation over sham/control (standardized mean difference (SMD)=0.25, CI95%[0.14;0.36]). Effects on strength (SMD=0.31, CI95%[0.10;0.51]) and visuomotor (SMD=0.29, CI95%[0.00;0.57]) tasks were larger than endurance performance (SMD=0.18, CI95%[0.00;0.37]). Meta-regressions indicated effect sizes were not related to stimulation parameters, but other factors such as genetics, gender, and experience may modulate tDCS effects. The results suggest tDCS has the potential to be used as an ergogenic aid in conjunction with a specified training regime.

Can Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Enhance Functionality in Older Adults? A Systematic Review

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive, easy to administer, well-tolerated, and safe technique capable of affecting brain excitability, both at the cortical and cerebellum levels. However, its effectiveness has not been sufficiently assessed in all population segments or clinical applications. This systematic review aimed at compiling and summarizing the currently available scientific evidence about the effect of tDCS on functionality in older adults over 60 years of age. A search of databases was conducted to find randomized clinical trials that applied tDCS versus sham stimulation in the above-mentioned population. No limits were established in terms of date of publication. A total of 237 trials were found, of which 24 met the inclusion criteria. Finally, nine studies were analyzed, including 260 healthy subjects with average age between 61.0 and 85.8 years. Seven of the nine included studies reported superior improvements in functionality variables following the application of tDCS compared to sham stimulation. Anodal tDCS applied over the motor cortex may be an effective technique for improving balance and posture control in healthy older adults. However, further high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to determine the most effective protocols and to clarify potential benefits for older adults.

Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Physical Training on the Excitability of the Motor Cortex, Physical Performance, and Motor Learning: A Systematic Review

Purpose: This systematic review aims to examine the efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with physical training on the excitability of the motor cortex, physical performance, and motor learning. Methods: A systematic search was performed on PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCO databases for relevant research published from inception to August 2020. Eligible studies included those that used a randomized controlled design and reported the effects of tDCS combined with physical training to improve motor-evoked potential (MEP), dynamic posture stability index (DPSI), reaction time, and error rate on participants without nervous system diseases. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. Results: Twenty-four of an initial yield of 768 studies met the eligibility criteria. The risk of bias was considered low. Results showed that anodal tDCS combined with physical training can significantly increase MEP amplitude, decrease DPSI, increase muscle strength, and decrease reaction time and error rate in motor learning tasks. Moreover, the gain effect is significantly greater than sham tDCS combined with physical training. Conclusion: tDCS combined with physical training can effectively improve the excitability of the motor cortex, physical performance, and motor learning. The reported results encourage further research to understand further the synergistic effects of tDCS combined with physical training.

Effect of conventional transcranial direct current stimulation devices and electrode sizes on motor cortical excitability of the quadriceps muscle

BACKGROUND

There is a growing concern among the scientific community that the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) are highly variable across studies. The use of different tDCS devices and electrode sizes may contribute to this variability; however, this issue has not been verified experimentally.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of tDCS device and electrode size on quadriceps motor cortical excitability.

METHODS

The effect of tDCS device and electrode size on quadriceps motor cortical excitability was quantified across a range of TMS intensities using a novel evoked torque approach that has been previously shown to be highly reliable. In experiment 1, anodal tDCS-induced excitability changes were measured in twenty individuals using two devices (Empi and Soterix) on two separate days. In experiment 2, anodal tDCS-induced excitability changes were measured in thirty individuals divided into three groups based on the electrode size. A novel Bayesian approach was used in addition to the classical hypothesis testing during data analyses.

RESULTS

There were no significant main or interaction effects, indicating that cortical excitability did not differ between different tDCS devices or electrode sizes. The lack of pre-post time effect in both experiments indicated that cortical excitability was minimally affected by anodal tDCS. Bayesian analyses indicated that the null model was more favored than the main or the interaction effects model.

CONCLUSIONS

Motor cortical excitability was not altered by anodal tDCS and did not differ by devices or electrode sizes used in the study. Future studies should examine if behavioral outcomes are different based on tDCS device or electrode size.

Effect of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Motor Cortex on Elbow Flexor Muscle Strength in the Very Old

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Muscle weakness predisposes older adults to a fourfold increase in functional limitations and has previously been associated with reduced motor cortex excitability in aging adults. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a single session of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) of the motor cortex would increase elbow flexion muscle strength and electromyographic (EMG) amplitude in very old individuals.

METHODS

Eleven very old individuals-85.8 (4.3) years-performed 3 maximal isometric elbow flexion contractions before and after 20 minutes of sham or anodal tDCS on different days. Order of stimulation was randomized, and the study participants and investigators were blinded to condition. In addition, voluntary activation capacity of the elbow flexors was determined by comparing voluntary and electrically evoked forces.

RESULTS

Anodal tDCS did not alter muscle strength or EMG activity in comparison to sham stimulation. Elbow flexion voluntary activation capacity was very high among the study participants: 99.3% (1.8%).

CONCLUSION

Contrary to our hypothesis, we observed no effect of anodal tDCS and no impairment in elbow flexor voluntary activation capacity in the very old. Whether anodal tDCS would exert a positive effect and support our initial hypothesis in another muscle group that does exhibit impairments in voluntary activation in older adults is a question that is still to be addressed.

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation enhances strength training volume but not the force-velocity profile

PURPOSE

This study aimed to explore the acute effect of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the force-velocity relationship, strength training volume, movement velocity, and ratings of perceived exertion.

METHODS

Fourteen healthy men (age 22.8 ± 3.0 years) were randomly stimulated over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex with either ANODAL, CATHODAL or SHAM tDCS for 15 min at 2 mA. The one-repetition maximum (1RM) and force-velocity relationship parameters were evaluated during the bench press exercise before and after receiving the tDCS. Subsequently, participants completed a resistance training session consisting of sets of five repetitions with 1 min of inter-set rest against the 75%1RM until failure.

RESULTS

No significant changes were observed in the 1RM or in the force-velocity relationship parameters (p ≥ 0.377). The number of repetitions was higher for the ANODAL compared to the CATHODAL (p = 0.025; ES = 0.37) and SHAM (p = 0.009; ES = 0.47) conditions. The reductions of movement velocity across sets were lower for the ANODAL than for the CATHODAL and SHAM condition (p = 0.014). RPE values were lower for the ANODAL compared to the CATHODAL (p = 0.119; ES = 0.33) and SHAM (p = 0.150; ES = 0.44) conditions. No significant differences between the CATHODAL and SHAM conditions were observed for any variable.

CONCLUSION

The application of ANODAL tDCS before a resistance training session increased training volume, enabled the maintenance of higher movement velocities, and reduced RPE values. These results suggest that tDCS could be an effective method to enhance resistance-training performance.

Effect of paired-pulse stimulus parameters on the two phases of short interval intracortical inhibition in the quadriceps muscle group

BACKGROUND

Short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) is commonly used to assess inhibition in the motor cortex and is known to be affected by the paired-pulse stimulus parameters (i.e., interstimulus interval [ISI], conditioning stimulus intensity [CSI] and test stimulus intensity [TSI]) used during testing. While the effects of stimulus parameters are well-studied in the upper-extremity, evidence in the lower-extremity is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively examine the effects of alterations in paired-pulse stimulus parameters on the two phases of SICI in the quadriceps muscle group.

METHODS

Seventeen adults (8 males, 9 females) volunteered to participate in this study. SICI was examined over a range of CSIs (70-90% active motor threshold [AMT]), TSIs (100-140% AMT), and ISIs (1.0-3.0 ms) using both EMG and torque responses elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS).

RESULTS

The results indicated that SICI at 1.0 ms ISI was best revealed with a CSI of 70% and TSI ≥110% AMT, whereas SICI at 2.5 ms ISI was best revealed with a CSI of 80-90% and a TSI of ≥130% AMT. Unlike upper-extremity muscles, evaluating SICI with a CSI of 70% AMT and an ISI of 1.0 ms produced the greatest inhibition for all TSIs. In general, inhibitory effects were contaminated by facilitatory effects when using a TSI of 100% AMT.

CONCLUSIONS

The amount of inhibition was dependent on the stimulation parameters used during testing. A CSI of 70% AMT, ISI of 1.0 ms, and TSI of ≥110% AMT appear to be optimal for measuring SICI in the quadriceps muscle; however, other parameters can be used if careful consideration is given to the described interaction between the parameters.

Short-Term Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Endurance and Maximal Force Production. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The purpose of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to explore the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on endurance (i.e., time to task failure (TTF)) and maximal voluntary contraction (MVC). Furthermore, we aimed to analyze whether the duration of stimulation, the brain region targeted for stimulation, and the task performed could also influence motor performance. We performed a systematic literature review in the databases MEDLINE and Web of Science. The short-term effects of anodal tDCS and sham stimulation (placebo) were considered as experimental and control conditions, respectively. A total of 31 interventions were included (MVC = 13; TTF = 18). Analysis of the strength-related tDCS studies showed small improvements in the MVC (SMD = 0.19; 95% CI = −0.02, 0.41; p = 0.08). However, the results of the endurance-related interventions indicated a moderate effect on TTF performance (SMD = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.07, 0.45; p = 0.008). Furthermore, the sub-analysis showed that anodal tDCS over M1 and stimulation durations longer than 10 min produced the best results in terms of TTF performance enhancement. Additionally, the effects of anodal tDCS were larger during full body exercises (i.e., cycling) when compared to uniarticular tasks. In conclusion, the current meta-analysis indicated that anodal tDCS leads to small and moderate effects on MVC and TTF, respectively.

Brain stimulation and physical performance

Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques have been used for decades to study brain function and for the treatment of various neurological disease. These techniques involve the passage of electrical current or magnetic field in a controlled manner to a targeted brain area. Recently, experimental studies explored the application of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for the improvement of physical performance in healthy individuals. In this chapter we reviewed and analyzed the current scientific literature, highlighted methodological limitations and also suggested possible neurophysiological mechanisms. The chapter also provides some technical and theoretical research-based principles for future research, to promote a better understanding of potential and caveats of this emerging field. Finally, ethical and regulatory issues related to performance enhancement via non-invasive brain stimulation are also discussed.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Does Not Affect Lower Extremity Muscle Strength Training in Healthy Individuals: A Triple-Blind, Sham-Controlled Study

The present study investigated the effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on lower extremity muscle strength training in 24 healthy participants. In this triple-blind, sham-controlled study, participants were randomly allocated to the anodal tDCS plus muscle strength training (anodal tDCS) group or sham tDCS plus muscle strength training (sham tDCS) group. Anodal tDCS (2 mA) was applied to the primary motor cortex of the lower extremity during muscle strength training of the knee extensors and flexors. Training was conducted once every 3 days for 3 weeks (7 sessions). Knee extensor and flexor peak torques were evaluated before and after the 3 weeks of training. After the 3-week intervention, peak torques of knee extension and flexion changed from 155.9 to 191.1 Nm and from 81.5 to 93.1 Nm in the anodal tDCS group. Peak torques changed from 164.1 to 194.8 Nm on extension and from 78.0 to 85.6 Nm on flexion in the sham tDCS group. In both groups, peak torques of knee extension and flexion significantly increased after the intervention, with no significant difference between the anodal tDCS and sham tDCS groups. In conclusion, although the administration of eccentric training increased knee extensor and flexor peak torques, anodal tDCS did not enhance the effects of lower extremity muscle strength training in healthy individuals. The present null results have crucial implications for selecting optimal stimulation parameters for clinical trials.