Article Data

  • Views 838
  • Dowloads 128

Original Research

Open Access Special Issue

Examining the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on the dominant motor cortex in the indirect measurement of physical ability

  • Inchon Park1
  • Youngsook Kim2
  • Seung Kyum Kim1,*,

1Department of Sports Science, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 01794 Seoul, Republic of Korea

2Department of Sports Science, Korean Institute of Sports Science, 01794 Seoul, Republic of Korea

DOI: 10.31083/j.jomh1803069 Vol.18,Issue 3,March 2022 pp.1-9

Submitted: 14 October 2021 Accepted: 03 December 2021

Published: 31 March 2022

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sports and physical activities for men’s health)

*Corresponding Author(s): Seung Kyum Kim E-mail: skkim7@seoultech.ac.kr

Abstract

Background: The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on specific sports skills have received extensive attention, however, it is difficult to accurately determine its effect on physical performance due to the complexity of the tasks. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of uni-hemispheric anodal tDCS of the motor cortex (M1) on the indirect measurement of physical ability in healthy men. Methods: Thirteen healthy, right-leg-dominant men aged between 21 and 32 years (26.53 ± 2.73 years) participated in two different experimental conditions in a randomized, single-blinded crossover design: anodal stimulation (a-tDCS) and sham-tDCS (2 mA for 20 minutes targeting the left M1 contralateral to dominant leg). Before and immediately after the tDCS stimulation, participants completed the standing long jump (SLJ) and sidestep test (SST), and their blood pressure and heart rate werechecked for the safety of tDCS application. Results: No significant difference was observed between a-tDCS and sham-tDCS (F(1,24) = 0.02, p = 0.86, η2 p = 0.001) on SLJ. Also, no significant changes in SLJ were observed between pre- and post-stimulation sessions for both conditions (F(1,24) = 1.18, p = 0.28, η2 p = 0.047). Similarly, SST scores were not significantly different from a-tDCS and sham-tDCS condition (F(1,24) = 0.57, p = 0.45, η2 p = 0.024). Significant changes in SST were not observed throughout the experiment sessions for both stimulation conditions (F(1,24) = 0.12, p = 0.73, η2 p = 0.005). Conclusions: The uni-hemispheric a-tDCS applied over the M1 for 20 minutes may not be a valuable tool to obtain the physical performance benefits from the tasks that require bilateral lower limb power output, such as SLJ and SST.

Keywords

Physical performance; tDCS; Primary motor cortex (M1); Agility

Cite and Share

Inchon Park,Youngsook Kim,Seung Kyum Kim. Examining the effect of transcranial direct current stimulation on the dominant motor cortex in the indirect measurement of physical ability. Journal of Men's Health. 2022. 18(3);1-9.

References

[1] Lattari E, Andrade ML, Filho AS, Moura AM, Neto GM, Silva JG, et al. Can Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improve the Resistance Strength and Decrease the Rating Perceived Scale in Recreational Weight-Training Experience? Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2016; 30: 3381–3387.

[2] Lattari E, Campos C, Lamego MK, Legey S, Neto GM, Rocha NB, et al. Can Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improve Muscle Power in Individuals with Advanced Weight-Training Experience? Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2020; 34: 97–103.

[3] Lattari E, de Oliveira BS, Oliveira BRR, de Mello Pedreiro RC, Machado S, Neto GAM. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on time limit and ratings of perceived exertion in physically active women. Neuroscience Letters. 2018; 662: 12–16.

[4] Romero-Arenas S, Calderón-Nadal G, Alix-Fages C, Jerez-Martínez A, Colomer-Poveda D, Márquez G. Transcranial Di-rect Current Stimulation does not Improve Countermovement Jump Performance in Young Healthy Men. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2021; 35: 2918–2921.

[5] Veldema J, Engelhardt A, Jansen P. Does anodal tDCS improve basketball performance? A randomized controlled trial. Euro-pean Journal of Sport Science. 2020; 1–10.

[6] Vargas VZ, Baptista AF, Pereira GOC, Pochini AC, Ejnisman B, Santos MB, et al. Modulation of Isometric Quadriceps Strength in Soccer Players with Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: a Crossover Study. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Re-search. 2018; 32: 1336–1341.

[7] Kal E, Prosée R, Winters M, Van Der Kamp J. Does implicit mo-tor learning lead to greater automatization of motor skills com-pared to explicit motor learning? A systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2018; 13: e0203591.

[8] Nitsche MA, Schauenburg A, Lang N, Liebetanz D, Exner C, Paulus W, et al. Facilitation of implicit motor learning by weak transcranial direct current stimulation of the primary motor cor-tex in the human. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2003; 15: 619–626.

[9] Nojima I, Watanabe T, Gyoda T, Sugata H, Ikeda T, Mima T. Transcranial static magnetic stimulation over the primary motor cortex alters sequential implicit motor learning. Neuroscience Letters. 2019; 696: 33–37.

[10] Poreisz C, Boros K, Antal A, Paulus W. Safety aspects of tran-scranial direct current stimulation concerning healthy subjects and patients. Brain Research Bulletin. 2007; 72: 208–214.

[11] Iyer MB, Mattu U, Grafman J, Lomarev M, Sato S, Wassermann EM. Safety and cognitive effect of frontal DC brain polarization in healthy individuals. Neurology. 2006; 64: 872–875.

[12] Schestatsky P, Simis M, Freeman R, Pascual-Leone A, Fregni F. Non-invasive brain stimulation and the autonomic nervous sys-tem. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2013; 124: 1716–1728.

[13] Santarnecchi E, Feurra M, Barneschi F, Acampa M, Bianco G, Cioncoloni D, et al. Time Course of Corticospinal Excitabil-ity and Autonomic Function Interplay during and Following Monopolar tDCS. Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2014; 5: 86.

[14] Clancy JA, Johnson R, Raw R, Deuchars SA, Deuchars J. An-odal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the mo-tor cortex increases sympathetic nerve activity. Brain Stimula-tion. 2014; 7: 97–104.

[15] Vandermeeren Y, Jamart J, Ossemann M. Effect of tDCS with an extracephalic reference electrode on cardio-respiratory and autonomic functions. BMC Neuroscience. 2010; 11: 38.

[16] Raimundo RJS, Uribe CE, Brasil-Neto JP. Lack of clinically de-tectable acute changes on autonomic or thermoregulatory func-tions in healthy subjects after transcranial direct current stimu-lation (tDCS). Brain Stimulation. 2012; 5: 196–200.

[17] Cogiamanian F, Brunoni AR, Boggio PS, Fregni F, Ciocca M, Priori A. Non-invasive brain stimulation for the management of arterial hypertension. Medical Hypotheses. 2010; 74: 332–336.

[18] Knotkova H, Rosedale M, Strauss SM, Horne J, Soto E, Cru-ciani RA, et al. Using Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Treat Depression in HIV-Infected Persons: The Outcomes of a Feasibility Study. Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2012; 3: 59.

[19] Keel JC, Smith MJ, Wassermann EM. A safety screening ques-tionnaire for transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clinical Neuro-physiology. 2001; 112: 720.

[20] Tanaka S, Hanakawa T, Honda M, Watanabe K. Enhancement of pinch force in the lower leg by anodal transcranial direct current stimulation. Experimental Brain Research. 2009; 196: 459–465.

[21] Lattari E, Rosa Filho BJ, Fonseca Junior SJ, Murillo-Rodriguez E, Rocha N, Machado S, et al. Effects on Volume Load and Ratings of Perceived Exertion in Individuals’ Advanced Weight Training after Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2020; 34: 89–96.

[22] Hendarto S, Rahayu T, Soegiyanto S, Safi’i M. The Develop-ment of Physical Potential Instrument of Taekwondo Ages 14– 17. Proceedings of the International Conference on Science and Education and Technology 2018 (ISET 2018). 2018.

[23] Elias LJ, Bryden MP, Bulman-Fleming MB. Footedness is a bet-ter predictor than is handedness of emotional lateralization. Neu-ropsychologia. 1998; 36: 37–43.

[24] Montenegro R, Okano A, Gurgel J, Porto F, Cunha F, Massaferri R, et al. Motor cortex tDCS does not improve strength perfor-mance in healthy subjects. Motriz: Revista De EducaçãO FíSica. 2015; 21: 185–193.

[25] Balsalobre-Fernández C, Glaister M, Lockey RA. The validity and reliability of an iPhone app for measuring vertical jump per-formance. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2016; 33: 1574–1579.

[26] Gallardo-Fuentes F, Gallardo-Fuentes J, Ramírez-Campillo R, Balsalobre-Fernández C, Martínez C, Caniuqueo A, et al. In-tersession and Intrasession Reliability and Validity of the my Jump App for Measuring Different Jump Actions in Trained Male and Female Athletes. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 2016; 30: 2049–2056.

[27] Medicine ACoS. ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. 9th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadel-phia. 2013.

[28] Lee C, Jung Y, Lee SJ, Im C. COMETS2: an advanced MAT-LAB toolbox for the numerical analysis of electric fields gener-ated by transcranial direct current stimulation. Journal of Neu-roscience Methods. 2017; 277: 56–62.

[29] Mayka MA, Corcos DM, Leurgans SE, Vaillancourt DE. Three-dimensional locations and boundaries of motor and premotor cortices as defined by functional brain imaging: a meta-analysis. NeuroImage. 2006; 31: 1453–1474.

[30] Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. In-ternational Journal of Medical Education. 2011; 2: 53–55.

[31] Min Y-S, Park JW, Park E, Kim A-R, Cha H, Gwak D-W, et al. Interhemispheric Functional Connectivity in the Primary Mo-tor Cortex Assessed by Resting-State Functional Magnetic Res-onance Imaging Aids Long-Term Recovery Prediction among Subacute Stroke Patients with Severe Hand Weakness. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2020; 9: 975.

[32] Angius L, Hopker J, Mauger AR. The Ergogenic Effects of Tran-scranial Direct Current Stimulation on Exercise Performance. Frontiers in Physiology. 2017; 8: 90.

[33] Frazer A, Williams J, Spittles M, Rantalainen T, Kidgell D. An-odal transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cor-tex increases cortical voluntary activation and neural plasticity. Muscle and Nerve. 2016; 54: 903–913.

[34] Codella R, Alongi R, Filipas L, Luzi L. Ergogenic Effects of Bi-hemispheric Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Fitness: a Randomized Cross-over Trial. International Journal of Sports Medicine. 2021; 42: 66–73.

[35] Hazime FA, da Cunha RA, Soliaman RR, Romancini ACB, Po-chini ADC, Ejnisman B, et al. ANODAL TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT CURRENT STIMULATION (TDCS) INCREASES ISOMETRIC STRENGTH of SHOULDER ROTATORS MUS-CLES in HANDBALL PLAYERS. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy. 2019; 12: 402–407.

[36] Mesquita PHC, Lage GM, Franchini E, Romano-Silva MA, Al-buquerque MR. Bi-hemispheric anodal transcranial direct cur- rent stimulation worsens taekwondo-related performance. Hu-man Movement Science. 2019; 66: 578–586.

[37] Perez MA, Cohen LG. Interhemispheric inhibition between pri-mary motor cortices: what have we learned? The Journal of Physiology. 2009; 587: 725–726.

[38] Diekhoff-Krebs S, Pool E, Sarfeld A, Rehme AK, Eickhoff SB, Fink GR, et al. Interindividual differences in motor network con-nectivity and behavioral response to iTBS in stroke patients. NeuroImage. 2018; 15: 559–571.

[39] Williams JA, Pascual-Leone A, Fregni F. Interhemispheric mod-ulation induced by cortical stimulation and motor training. Phys-ical Therapy. 2010; 90: 398–410.

[40] Mlinarić A, Horvat M, Šupak Smolčić V. Dealing with the pos-itive publication bias: why you should really publish your neg-ative results. Biochemia Medica. 2019; 27: 030201.

[41] DeVito NJ, Goldacre B. Catalogue of bias: publication bias. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 2019; 24: 53–54.

[42] Hampstead BM, Brown GS, Hartley JF. Transcranial Direct Cur-rent Stimulation Modulates Activation and Effective Connectiv-ity during Spatial Navigation. Brain Stimulation. 2014; 7: 314–324.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) DOAJ is a unique and extensive index of diverse open access journals from around the world, driven by a growing community, committed to ensuring quality content is freely available online for everyone.

SCImago The SCImago Journal & Country Rank is a publicly available portal that includes the journals and country scientific indicators developed from the information contained in the Scopus® database (Elsevier B.V.)

Publication Forum - JUFO (Federation of Finnish Learned Societies) Publication Forum is a classification of publication channels created by the Finnish scientific community to support the quality assessment of academic research.

Scopus: CiteScore 0.9 (2023) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers Search for publication channels (journals, series and publishers) in the Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers to see if they are considered as scientific. (https://kanalregister.hkdir.no/publiseringskanaler/Forside).

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top