Time course of changes in corticospinal excitability induced by motor imagery during action observation combined with peripheral nerve electrical stimulation
- 28 Downloads
While previous studies assessed corticospinal excitability changes during and after motor imagery (MI) or action observation (AO) combined with peripheral nerve electrical stimulation (ES), we examined, for the first time, the time course of corticospinal excitability changes for MI during AO combined with ES (AO–MI + ES) using transcranial magnetic stimulation to measure motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in healthy individuals. Fourteen healthy volunteers participated in the following three sessions on different days: AO–MI alone, ES alone, and AO–MI + ES. In the AO–MI task, participants imagined squeezing and relaxing a ball, along with the respective actions shown in a movie, while passively holding the ball. We applied ES (intensity, 90% of the motor threshold) to the ulnar nerve at the wrist, which innervates the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle. We assessed the FDI muscle MEPs at baseline and after every 5 min of the task for a total of 20 min. Additionally, participants completed the Vividness of Movement Imagery Questionnaire-2 (VMIQ-2) at the beginning of the experiment. Compared to baseline, AO–MI + ES significantly increased corticospinal excitability after 10 min, while AO–MI or ES alone had no effect on corticospinal excitability after 20 min. Moreover, the AO–MI + ES-induced cortical excitability changes were correlated with the VMIQ-2 scores for visual and kinaesthetic imagery. Collectively, our findings indicate that AO–MI + ES induces cortical plasticity earlier than does AO–MI or ES alone and that an individual’s imagery ability plays an important role in inducing cortical excitability changes following AO–MI + ES.
KeywordsMotor imagery Action observation Peripheral nerve electrical stimulation Neural plasticity Rehabilitation
This work was partially supported by grants from the Funds for a Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (15K16370 and 18K17723) to Tomofumi Yamaguchi and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP16K19521 to Michiyuki Kawakami.
Compliance with ethical standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
- Abbas AL, Lucas MF, Teixeira S, Paes F, Velasques B, Ribeiro P, Nardi AE, Machado S (2011) Motor imagery and stroke neurorehabilitation: an overview of basic concepts and therapeutic effects. Am J Neurosci 2:59–64Google Scholar
- Fujiwara T, Kasashima Y, Honaga K, Muraoka Y, Tsuji T, Osu R, Hase K, Masakado Y, Liu M (2009) Motor improvement and corticospinal modulation induced by hybrid assistive neuromuscular dynamic stimulation (HANDS) therapy in patients with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 23:125–132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kawakami M, Fujiwara T, Ushiba J, Nishimoto A, Abe K, Honaga K, Nishimura A, Mizuno K, Kodama M, Masakado Y, Liu M (2016) A new therapeutic application of brain-machine interface (BMI) training followed by hybrid assistive neuromuscular dynamic stimulation (HANDS) therapy for patients with severe hemiparetic stroke: a proof of concept study. Restor Neurol Neurosci 34:789–797PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Okuyama K, Ogura M, Kawakami M, Tsujimoto K, Okada K, Miwa K, Takahashi Y, Abe K, Tanabe S, Yamaguchi T, Liu M (2018) Effect of the combination of motor imagery and electrical stimulation on upper extremity motor function in patients with chronic stroke: preliminary results. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 11:1756286418804785CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Yamaguchi T, Fujiwara T, Tsai YA, Tang SC, Kawakami M, Mizuno K, Kodama M, Masakado Y, Liu M (2016) The effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation and patterned electrical stimulation on spinal inhibitory interneurons and motor function in patients with spinal cord injury. Exp Brain Res 234:1469–1478CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar