(TMS) metrics were measured in the intervention and nonintervention extensor carpi radialis. Results There was 27 % motor learning and 9 % (both p < 0.001) interlimb transfer in all groups but SES added to MP did not augment learning and transfer. Corticospinal excitability increased after MP and SES when measured at rest but it increased after MP and decreased after SES when measured during contraction. No changes occurred in intracortical inhibition and facilitation. MP did not affect the TMS metrics in the transfer hand. In contrast, corticospinal excitability strongly increased after SES with MP + SES showing sharply opposite of these effects. Conclusion Motor practice and SES each can produce motor learning and interlimb transfer and are likely to be mediated by different mechanisms. The results provide insight into the physiological mechanisms underlying the effects of MP and SES on motor learning and cortical plasticity and show that these mechanisms are likely to be different for the trained and stimulated motor cortex and the non-trained and non-stimulated motor cortex. Keywords

No abstract

No abstract