UCL  IRIS
Institutional Research Information Service
UCL Logo
Please report any queries concerning the funding data grouped in the sections named "Externally Awarded" or "Internally Disbursed" (shown on the profile page) to your Research Finance Administrator. Your can find your Research Finance Administrator at https://www.ucl.ac.uk/finance/research/rs-contacts.php by entering your department
Please report any queries concerning the student data shown on the profile page to:

Email: portico-services@ucl.ac.uk

Help Desk: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ras/portico/helpdesk
Publication Detail
Variability in response to transcranial direct current stimulation of the motor cortex.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal article
  • Publication Sub Type:
    Journal Article
  • Authors:
    Wiethoff S, Hamada M, Rothwell JC
  • Publication date:
    2014
  • Pagination:
    468, 475
  • Journal:
    Brain Stimul
  • Volume:
    7
  • Issue:
    3
  • Status:
    Published
  • Country:
    United States
  • PII:
    S1935-861X(14)00097-7
  • Language:
    eng
  • Keywords:
    Facilitation, I-waves, Motor cortex, Plasticity, Transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS), Adolescent, Adult, Cross-Over Studies, Electric Stimulation, Electrodes, Equipment Design, Evoked Potentials, Motor, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Cortex, Neuronal Plasticity, Reproducibility of Results, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Young Adult
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Responses to a number of different plasticity-inducing brain stimulation protocols are highly variable. However there is little data available on the variability of response to transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS). OBJECTIVE: We tested the effects of TDCS over the motor cortex on corticospinal excitability. We also examined whether an individual's response could be predicted from measurements of onset latency of motor evoked potential (MEP) following stimulation with different orientations of monophasic transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). METHODS: Fifty-three healthy subjects participated in a crossover-design. Baseline latency measurements with different coil orientations and MEPs were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous muscle prior to the application of 10 min of 2 mA TDCS (0.057 mA/cm2). Thirty MEPs were measured every 5 min for up to half an hour after the intervention to assess after-effects on corticospinal excitability. RESULTS: Anodal TDCS at 2 mA facilitated MEPs whereas there was no significant effect of 2 mA cathodal TDCS. A two-step cluster analysis suggested that approximately 50% individuals had only a minor, or no response to TDCS whereas the remainder had a facilitatory effect to both forms of stimulation. There was a significant correlation between the latency difference of MEPs (anterior-posterior stimulation minus latero-medial stimulation) and the response to anodal, but not cathodal TDCS. CONCLUSIONS: The large variability in response to these TDCS protocols is in line with similar studies using other forms of non-invasive brain stimulation. The effects highlight the need to develop more robust protocols, and understand the individual factors that determine responsiveness.
Publication data is maintained in RPS. Visit https://rps.ucl.ac.uk
 More search options
UCL Researchers
Author
Clinical and Movement Neurosciences
University College London - Gower Street - London - WC1E 6BT Tel:+44 (0)20 7679 2000

© UCL 1999–2011

Search by