Comparing the effects of focal and conventional tDCS on motor skill learning: A proof of principle study

Iannone, Aline; Santiago, Irene; Ajao, Silvia T.; Brasil‐Neto, Joaquim P.; Rothwell, John C.; Spampinato, Danny

doi:10.1016/j.neures.2022.01.006

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…healthy young adults (24.2 ± .92 years) and found no online differences between conventional, HD, and sham tDCS but improved motor skill retention (quantified as changes in speed-accuracy trade-off) shortly postintervention, only following HD tDCS (Iannone et al, 2022). Opposite to our findings, Iannone et al (2022) suggest a beneficial influence of HD tDCS on sequential skill learning.…”

Section: Glmmcontrasting

confidence: 75%

“…Additionally, anodal HD tDCS significantly slowed RTs across all learning phases—particularly in sequential blocks—compared with sham. Two studies previously compared effects of a conventional and HD tDCS montage, similar to those employed in the present study, on IMSL (Cole et al, 2018; Iannone et al, 2022). Our findings of worsened SRT performance following HD tDCS are in line with those of Cole et al (2018), who assessed these differential effects in children (15.51 ± 1.7 years).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our findings of worsened SRT performance following HD tDCS are in line with those of Cole et al (2018), who assessed these differential effects in children (15.51 ± 1.7 years). Iannone et al (2022) employed the sequential visuomotor isometric pinch force task in healthy young adults (24.2 ± .92 years) and found no online differences between conventional, HD, and sham tDCS but improved motor skill retention (quantified as changes in speed‐accuracy trade‐off) shortly post‐intervention, only following HD tDCS (Iannone et al, 2022). Opposite to our findings, Iannone et al (2022) suggest a beneficial influence of HD tDCS on sequential skill learning.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Iannone et al (2022) employed the sequential visuomotor isometric pinch force task in healthy young adults (24.2 ± .92 years) and found no online differences between conventional, HD, and sham tDCS but improved motor skill retention (quantified as changes in speed‐accuracy trade‐off) shortly post‐intervention, only following HD tDCS (Iannone et al, 2022). Opposite to our findings, Iannone et al (2022) suggest a beneficial influence of HD tDCS on sequential skill learning. However, it is noteworthy that the sequential visuomotor isometric pinch force task employed in their study primarily addresses motor functions, emphasizing precise control of pinch force, whereas the SRT task involves minimal motor demands and primarily targets cognitive functions engaged during sequential motor behaviour (Hashemirad et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our findings of worsened SRT performance following HD tDCS are in line with those of Cole et al (2018), who assessed these differential effects in children (15.51 ± 1.7 years). Iannone et al (2022) employed the sequential visuomotor isometric pinch force task in F I G U R E 5 GLE in the conventional and HD M1 tDCS groups: interaction effects between the factors Group, Stimulation condition, Session, and Block. Red lines denote conventional tDCS, and blue lines denote 4 * 1 HD tDCS.…”

Section: Glmmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Differential effects of conventional and high‐definition transcranial direct‐current stimulation of the motor cortex on implicit motor sequence learning

Firouzi,

Baetens,

Saeys

et al. 2023

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional transcranial direct‐current stimulation (tDCS) delivered to the primary motor cortex (M1) has been shown to enhance implicit motor sequence learning (IMSL). Conventional tDCS targets M1 but also the motor association cortices (MAC), making the precise contribution of these areas to IMSL presently unclear. We aimed to address this issue by comparing conventional tDCS of M1 and MAC to 4 * 1 high‐definition (HD) tDCS, which more focally targets M1. In this mixed‐factorial, sham‐controlled, crossover study in 89 healthy young adults, we used mixed‐effects models to analyse sequence‐specific and general learning effects in the acquisition and short‐ and long‐term consolidation phases of IMSL, as measured by the serial reaction time task. Conventional tDCS did not influence general learning, improved sequence‐specific learning during acquisition (anodal: M = 42.64 ms, sham: M = 32.87 ms, p = .041), and seemingly deteriorated it at long‐term consolidation (anodal: M = 75.37 ms, sham: M = 86.63 ms, p = .019). HD tDCS did not influence general learning, slowed performance specifically in sequential blocks across all learning phases (all p's < .050), and consequently deteriorated sequence‐specific learning during acquisition (anodal: M = 24.13 ms, sham: M = 35.67 ms, p = .014) and long‐term consolidation (anodal: M = 60.03 ms, sham: M = 75.01 ms, p = .002). Our findings indicate that the observed superior conventional tDCS effects on IMSL are possibly attributable to a generalized stimulation of M1 and/or adjacent MAC, rather than M1 alone. Alternatively, the differential effects can be attributed to cathodal inhibition of other cortical areas involved in IMSL by the 4 * 1 HD tDCS return electrodes, and/or more variable electric field strengths induced by HD tDCS, compared with conventional tDCS.

show abstract

Section: Glmmcontrasting

confidence: 75%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our findings of worsened SRT performance following HD tDCS are in line with those of Cole et al (2018), who assessed these differential effects in children (15.51 ± 1.7 years). Iannone et al (2022) employed the sequential visuomotor isometric pinch force task in F I G U R E 5 GLE in the conventional and HD M1 tDCS groups: interaction effects between the factors Group, Stimulation condition, Session, and Block. Red lines denote conventional tDCS, and blue lines denote 4 * 1 HD tDCS.…”

Section: Glmmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations