Effects of Anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Somatosensory Recovery After Stroke

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) has been proposed as a possible therapeutic rehabilitation technique for motor impairment. However, despite extensive investigation into the effects of anodal tDCS on motor output, there is little information on how anodal tDCS affects response processes. In this study, we used a cued go/nogo task with both directional and non-directional cues to assess the effects of anodal tDCS over the dominant (left) primary motor cortex on prepared and unprepared motor responses. Three experiments explored whether the effectiveness of tDCS varied with timing between stimulation and test. Healthy, right-handed young adults participated in a double-blind randomised controlled design with crossover of anodal tDCS and sham stimulation. In Experiment 1, twenty-four healthy young adults received anodal tDCS over dominant M1 at least 40 mins before task performance. In Experiment 2, eight participants received anodal tDCS directly before task performance. In Experiment 3, twenty participants received anodal tDCS during task performance. In all three experiments, participants responded faster to directional compared to non-directional cues and with their right hand. However, anodal tDCS had no effect on go/nogo task performance at any stimulation – test interval. Bayesian analysis confirmed that anodal stimulation had no effect on response speed. We conclude that anodal tDCS over M1 does not improve response speed of prepared or unprepared responses of young adults in a go/nogo task.

PB11. Long term GABA alterations induced by anodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in motor cortex: A proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy study

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Psychiatry.

Motor cortex transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to enhance motor learning in healthy adults as well as various neurological conditions. However, there has been limited data on whether tDCS enhances jaw motor performance during different oral behaviors such as speech, maximum syllable repetition, and chewing. Because the effects of anodal and cathodal stimulation are known to be dependent on task demands, we hypothesized that tDCS would have a distinct effect on the jaw motor performance during these disparate oral behaviors. Ten healthy adults completed speech, maximum syllable repetition, and chewing tasks as their jaw movements were recorded using 3D optical motion capture during sham, anodal, and cathodal tDCS. Our findings showed that compared to the sham condition, jaw displacements during speech and syllable repetition were smaller during anodal stimulation, but larger during cathodal stimulation for syllable repetition and chewing indicating improved performance during anodal tDCS. On the other hand, there were no effects of anodal tDCS during chewing. These results confirm our hypotheses that: (1) tDCS induces a significant effect on jaw motor function; (2) its effects are polarity dependent; and (3) its effects are dependent on the task demands on jaw motor function. These findings support future studies exploring the effects of tDCS on persons with oral sensorimotor impairments and the development of therapeutic protocols.

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder with motor and non-motor symptoms due to degeneration of dopaminergic neurons. The current pharmacological treatments induce complications associated with long-term use. However, current stimulation techniques for PD treatment, such as deep brain stimulation (DBS), are too invasive. In this context, non-invasive brain stimulation including transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) may be a safe and effective alternative treatment for PD. We previously reported that anodal tDCS over the frontal polar area (FPA) improved motor functions in heathy subjects. Therefore, in the present study, effects of tDCS over the FPA on motor and cognitive functions of PD patients were analyzed. Nine PD patients (3 men and 6 women) participated in this cross over study with three tDCS protocols; anodal, cathodal or sham tDCS over the FPA. Each tDCS protocol was applied for 1 week (5 times/week). Before and after each protocol, motor and cognitive functions of the patients were assessed using Unified PD Rating Scale [UPDRS (part III: motor examination)], Fugl Meyer Assessment set (FMA), Simple Test for Evaluating hand Function (STEF) and Trail Making Test A (TMT-A). The results indicated that anodal stimulation significantly decreased scores of motor disability in UPDRS-III compared with sham and cathodal stimulation, and significantly increased scores of motor functions in FMA compared with sham stimulation. Furthermore, anodal stimulation significantly decreased time to complete a motor task requiring high dexterity in STEF compared with those requiring low and medium levels of dexterity. In addition, anodal stimulation significantly decreased time to complete the TMT-A task, which requires executive functions, compared with sham stimulation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first clinical research reporting that tDCS over the FPA successfully improved the motor and non-motor functions in PD patients. These findings suggest that tDCS over the FPA might be a useful alternative for the treatment of PD patients.

Lewis, A, Rattray, B, and Flood, A. Does cathodal preconditioning enhance the effects of subsequent anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on corticospinal excitability and grip strength? J Strength Cond Res 39(1): e1-e12, 2025-Inconsistent effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on corticospinal excitability (CSE) and exercise performance are commonly reported. Cathodal preconditioning, involving cathodal tDCS delivered before anodal tDCS over the same region, may enhance changes in CSE and exercise beyond that resulting from anodal tDCS alone. This study aimed to investigate whether the effects of anodal tDCS on CSE and isometric grip strength can be enhanced by cathodal preconditioning. Thirty-five healthy subjects aged 19-37 years completed a familiarization session followed by 4 stimulation conditions presented in a randomized cross-over design across 4 separate sessions. tDCS doses were applied at 2 mA over the primary motor cortex for 10 minutes. Corticospinal excitability was assessed using 120% of resting motor threshold and an input/output curve of motor evoked potentials of the first dorsal interosseous. Grip strength was evaluated as time to exhaustion (TTE) in a sustained isometric contraction. Relative to conventional sham stimulation, TTE was significantly increased by 15% after conventional anodal tDCS. Corticospinal excitability increased in response to tDCS, but this effect did not differ across conditions. Cathodal preconditioning before anodal stimulation did not increase CSE or grip strength beyond that seen in the other stimulation conditions. Our findings did not reveal any significant impact of stimulation type on CSE. Notably, anodal tDCS led to a significant improvement in grip strength endurance. However, cathodal preconditioning did not seem to increase the effect of subsequent anodal stimulation on CSE nor grip strength.

Background: The use of transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) for therapeutic and neurorehabilitation purposes has become increasingly popular in recent years. Previous research has found that anodal tDCS may enhance naming ability and verbal fluency in healthy participants. However, the effect of tDCS on more functional, higher level language skills such as discourse production has yet to be understood.Aims: The present study aimed to investigate in healthy, older adults (a) the effect of anodal tDCS on discourse production vs. sham stimulation and (b) optimal electrode placement for tDCS to target language improvement at the discourse level.Methods: Fourteen healthy, older right-handed participants took part in this sham controlled, repeated measures pilot study. Each participant experienced three different experimental conditions; anodal tDCS on the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), anodal tDCS on the right IFG and sham stimulation while performing a story telling task. Significant changes in language performance before and after each condition were examined in three discourse production tasks: recount, procedural and narrative.Results: Left and right IFG conditions showed a greater number of significant within-group improvements (p < 0.05) in discourse production compared to sham with 6/12 for left IFG, 4/12 for right IFG and 2/12 for sham. There were no significant differences noted between tDCS conditions. No relationship was noted between language performance and physical activity, age, or gender.Conclusions: This study suggests that anodal tDCS may significantly improve discourse production in healthy, older adults. In line with previous tDCS language studies, the left IFG is highlighted as an optimal stimulation site for the modulation of language in healthy speakers. The findings support further exploration of tDCS as a rehabilitative tool for higher-level language skills in persons with aphasia.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Enhances Reconsolidation of Long-Term Memory

A number of studies investigating the biological effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) using magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) have found that it may affect local levels of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), glutamate and glutamine (commonly measured together as “Glx” in spectroscopy), and N-acetyl aspartate (NAA), however, these effects depend largely on the stimulation parameters used and the cortical area targeted. Given that different cortical areas may respond to stimulation in different ways, the purpose of this experiment was to assess the as yet unexplored biological effects of tDCS in the posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG), an area that has attracted some attention as a potential target for the treatment of auditory verbal hallucinations in schizophrenia patients. Biochemical changes were monitored using continuous, online MRS at a field strength of 3 Tesla. Performing intrascanner stimulation, with continuous spectroscopy before, during and after stimulation, permitted the assessment of acute effects of tDCS that would otherwise be lost when simply comparing pre- and post-stimulation differences. Twenty healthy participants underwent a repeated-measures experiment in which they received both active anodal and sham intrascanner stimulation in a stratified, randomized, double-blind experiment. No significant changes in GABA, Glx, or NAA levels were observed as a result of anodal stimulation, or between active and sham stimulation, suggesting that a single session of anodal tDCS to the pSTG may be less effective than in other cortical areas that have been similarly investigated.

To assess whether anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is effective in modulating lower limb spasticity in MS patients. Previously, anodal tDCS has been shown to improve motor deficits in several neurological diseases and, recently, it has been proposed as effective in decreasing spasticity after stroke. However, the effect of anodal tDCS on spasticity is not examined in MS. We performed a single-centre randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study to investigate efficacy of anodal vs sham tDCS in 20 relapsing-remitting MS patients. Ten patients received anodal tDCS stimulation to the primary motor cortex of the more affected side, 20 minutes/day for 5 consecutive days. Ten patients received sham tDCS stimulation. Spasticity was assessed by using the modified Ashworth scale (MAS), the self-scoring MSSS-88 (Multiple Sclerosis Spasticity Scale) and Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale (MSWS-12) at baseline and at the end of protocol stimulation. No side effects were detected during either anodal tDCS or sham. In both groups, there was no significant improvement in MAS, MSSS-88 and MSWS-12 scores. Moreover the comparison between anodal tDCS and sham showed no difference. Five-daily sessions of anodal tDCS to the primary motor cortex does do not improve lower limb spasticity in MS patients.

The contribution of poor finger force control to age-related decline in manual dexterity is above and beyond ubiquitous behavioral slowing. Altered control of the finger forces can impart unwanted torque on the object affecting its orientation, thus impairing manual performance. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over primary motor cortex (M1) has been shown to improve the performance speed on manual tasks in older adults. However, the effects of anodal tDCS over M1 on the finger force control during object manipulation in older adults remain to be fully explored. Here we determined the effects of anodal tDCS over M1 on the control of grip force in older adults while they manipulated an object with an uncertain mechanical property. Eight healthy older adults were instructed to grip and lift an object whose contact surfaces were unexpectedly made more or less slippery across trials using acetate and sandpaper surfaces, respectively. Subjects performed this task before and after receiving anodal or sham tDCS over M1 on two separate sessions using a cross-over design. We found that older adults used significantly lower grip force following anodal tDCS compared to sham tDCS. Friction measured at the finger-object interface remained invariant after anodal and sham tDCS. These findings suggest that anodal tDCS over M1 improved the control of grip force during object manipulation in healthy older adults. Although the cortical networks for representing objects and manipulative actions are complex, the reduction in grip force following anodal tDCS over M1 might be due to a cortical excitation yielding improved processing of object-specific sensory information and its integration with the motor commands for production of manipulative forces. Our findings indicate that tDCS has a potential to improve the control of finger force during dexterous manipulation in older adults.

The electrophysiological evidence supporting the therapeutic efficacy of multiple transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) sessions on consciousness improvement in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (DOCs) has not been firmly established. To assess the effects of repeated tDCS in patients with prolonged DOCs by Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) score and event-related potential (ERP). Using a sham-controlled randomized double-blind design, 26 patients were randomly assigned to either a real [five vegetative state (VS) and eight minimally conscious state (MCS) patients] or sham (six VS and seven MCS patients) stimulation group. The patients in the real stimulation group underwent 20 anodal tDCS sessions of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) over 10 consecutive working days. The CRS-R score and P300 amplitude and latency in a hierarchical cognitive assessment were recorded to evaluate the consciousness level before tDCS and immediately after the 20 sessions. The intra-group CRS-R analysis revealed a clinically significant improvement in the MCS patients in the real stimulation group. The inter-group CRS-R analysis showed a significant difference in CRS-R between VS and MCS patients at baseline in both the real and sham stimulation groups. The intra-group ERP analysis revealed a significant increase in P300 amplitude after tDCS in the MCS patients in the real stimulation group, but no significant differences in P300 latency. For the inter-group ERP analysis, we observed significant differences regarding the presence of P300 at baseline between the VS and MCS patients in both groups. The repeated anodal tDCS of the left DLPFC could produce clinically significant improvements in MCS patients. The observed tDCS-related consciousness improvements might be related to improvements in attention resource allocation (reflected by the P300 amplitude). The findings support the use of tDCS in clinical practice and ERP might serve as an efficient electrophysiological assessment tool in patients with DOCs.

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on executive functions: Influence of COMT Val/Met polymorphism

P 67. COMT Val/Met polymorphism and the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on executive functions

Arithmetic abilities are among the most important school-taught skills and form the basis for higher mathematical competencies. At the same time, their acquisition and application can be challenging. Hence, there is broad interest in methods to improve arithmetic abilities. One promising method is transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). In the present study, we compared two anodal tDCS protocols in their efficacy to improve arithmetic performance and working memory. In addition, we investigated stimulation-related electrophysiological changes. Three groups of participants solved arithmetic problems (additions and subtractions) and an n-back task before, during, and after receiving either frontal or parietal anodal tDCS (25 min; 1 mA) or sham stimulation. EEG was simultaneously recorded to assess stimulation effects on event-related (de-) synchronisation (ERS/ERD) in theta and alpha bands. Persons receiving frontal stimulation showed an acceleration of calculation speed in large subtractions from before to during and after stimulation. However, a comparable, but delayed (apparent only after stimulation) increase was also found in the sham stimulation group, while it was absent in the group receiving parietal stimulation. In additions and small subtractions as well as the working memory task, analyses showed no effects of stimulation. Results of ERS/ERD during large subtractions indicate changes in ERS/ERD patterns over time. In the left hemisphere there was a change from theta band ERD to ERS in all three groups, whereas a similar change in the right hemisphere was restricted to the sham group. Taken together, tDCS did not lead to a general improvement of arithmetic performance. However, results indicate that frontal stimulation accelerated training gains, while parietal stimulation halted them. The absence of general performance improvements, but acceleration of training effects might be a further indicator of the advantages of using tDCS as training or learning support over tDCS as a sole performance enhancer.