Physiological Basis of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Stagg, Charlotte J.; Nitsche, Michael A.

doi:10.1177/1073858410386614

Cited by 1,417 publications

(1,275 citation statements)

References 135 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,225

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Increased spontaneous neuronal firing and synaptic efficacy induced by direct‐current stimulation may strengthen neuronal connectivity through long‐term potentiation‐like mechanisms41, 42, 43. These mechanisms may potentiate motor learning, which is also thought to depend on long‐term potentiation‐like plasticity occurring in the motor cortex44.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of transcranial direct-current stimulation on laparoscopic surgical skill acquisition

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundChanges in medical education may limit opportunities for trainees to gain proficiency in surgical skills. Transcranial direct‐current stimulation (tDCS) can augment motor skill learning and may enhance surgical procedural skill acquisition. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of tDCS on simulation‐based laparoscopic surgical skill acquisition.MethodsIn this double‐blind, sham‐controlled randomized trial, participants were randomized to receive 20 min of anodal tDCS or sham stimulation over the dominant primary motor cortex, concurrent with Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery simulation‐based training. Primary outcomes of laparoscopic pattern‐cutting and peg transfer tasks were scored at baseline, during repeated performance over 1 h, and again at 6 weeks. Intent‐to‐treat analysis examined the effects of treatment group on skill acquisition and retention.ResultsOf 40 participants, those receiving tDCS achieved higher mean(s.d.) final pattern‐cutting scores than participants in the sham group (207·6(30·0) versus 186·0(32·7) respectively; P = 0·022). Scores were unchanged at 6 weeks. Effects on peg transfer scores were not significantly different (210·2(23·5) in the tDCS group versus 201·7(18·1) in the sham group; P = 0·111); the proportion achieving predetermined proficiency levels was higher for tDCS than for sham stimulation. Procedures were well tolerated with no serious adverse events and no decreases in motor measures.ConclusionThe addition of tDCS to laparoscopic surgical training may enhance skill acquisition. Trials of additional skills and translation to non‐simulated performance are required to determine the potential value in medical education and impact on patient outcomes. Registration number: NCT02756052 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of transcranial direct-current stimulation on laparoscopic surgical skill acquisition

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within the cortex, tDCS modulates synaptic strength and likely stimulates neurons in the cortex, pyramidal neurons, and interneurons (Stagg and Nitsche, 2011). Several neuromodulators such as GABA (Stagg et al, 2009), Na + and Ca 2+ channel blockers (Nitsche et al, 2004), l-DOPA (Kuo et al, 2008), and the D 2 receptor agonists Monte-Silva et al, 2009) also have an effect on increasing and/or decreasing the effects of tDCS stimulation (for more see Stagg and Nitsche, 2011). Some progress in linking DNA genotypes with cognitive performance is underway.…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Tdcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, we used transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) during which small amounts of electric current are applied to the scalp to modulate the excitability of underlying neural populations Rosenkranz et al, 2000;Antal et al, 2004a;Paulus, 2011;Stagg and Nitsche, 2011;Jacobson et al, 2012). This is an appealing alternative because it can modulate the activity in relatively small regions of cortex without the influence of cortical reorganization as may happen with patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although it is a simplification, anodal tDCS has been associated with the depolarization of neurons and making them more likely to fire whereas cathodal tDCS has been associated with hyperpolarizing neurons and making them less likely to fire (Purpura and McMurtry, 1965). Although the mechanism of tDCS remains an area of active research, there is evidence to suggest that in the cortex tDCS modulates synaptic strength and likely stimulates pyramidal neurons and interneurons (Nitsche et al, 2005;Stagg and Nitsche, 2011). As a therapy, tDCS has shown some success in treating major depression (Fregni et al, 2006a,b;Brunoni et al, 2011), memory deficits in Parkinson's disease (Boggio et al, 2006), memory deficits in Alzheimer's disease (Boggio et al, 2009(Boggio et al, , 2012, aphasia (Baker et al, 2010;Kang et al, 2011;You et al, 2011), and as a recovery aid for stroke patients (Fregni et al, 2005b;Miniussi et al, 2008;Jo et al, 2009;Kang et al, 2009;Bolognini et al, 2011;Bueno et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parietal Contributions to Visual Working Memory Depend on Task Difficulty

Jones¹,

Crane²,

Feenstra³

et al. 2012

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature of parietal contributions to working memory (WM) remain poorly understood but of considerable interest. We previously reported that posterior parietal damage selectively impaired WM probed by recognition (Berryhill and Olson, 2008a). Recent studies provided support using a neuromodulatory technique, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied to the right parietal cortex (P4). These studies confirmed parietal involvement in WM because parietal tDCS altered WM performance: anodal current tDCS improved performance in a change detection task, and cathodal current tDCS impaired performance on a sequential presentation task. Here, we tested whether these complementary results were due to different degrees of parietal involvement as a function of WM task demands, WM task difficulty, and/or participants' WM capacity. In Experiment 1, we applied cathodal and anodal tDCS to the right parietal cortex and tested participants on both previously used WM tasks. We observed an interaction between tDCS (anodal, cathodal), WM task difficulty, and participants' WM capacity. When the WM task was difficult, parietal stimulation (anodal or cathodal) improved WM performance selectively in participants with high WM capacity. In the low WM capacity group, parietal stimulation (anodal or cathodal) impaired WM performance. These nearly equal and opposite effects were only observed when the WM task was challenging, as in the change detection task. Experiment 2 probed the interplay of WM task difficulty and WM capacity in a parametric manner by varying set size in the WM change detection task. Here, the effect of parietal stimulation (anodal or cathodal) on the high WM capacity group followed a linear function as WM task difficulty increased with set size. The low WM capacity participants were largely unaffected by tDCS. These findings provide evidence that parietal involvement in WM performance depends on both WM capacity and WM task demands. We discuss these findings in terms of alternative WM strategies employed by low and high WM capacity individuals. We speculate that low WM capacity individuals do not recruit the posterior parietal lobe for WM tasks as efficiently as high WM capacity individuals. Consequently, tDCS provides greater benefit to individuals with high WM capacity.

show abstract

“…In other words, ISR was tested long after the increases in excitability driven directly by tDCS had passed (short single doses of anodal tDCS have, so far, been shown to alter motor cortex excitability for 1-2 hours, e.g., Batsikadze, Moliadze, Paulus, Kuo, & Nitsche, 2013;see Nitsche et al, 2008). Instead, the increased excitability elicited by anodal tDCS (during stimulation; Stagg & Nitsche, 2011) facilitated the acquisition of the phonological forms of the nonwords in long-term memory. This effect is likely to reflect the contributions of a number of neighbouring brain regions supporting aspects of phonological processing, including phonological short-term memory (Warrington & Shallice, 1969;Paulesu, Frith, & Frackowiak, 1993;Jonides et al, 1998;Henson, Burgess, & Frith, 2000;Buchsbaum & Esposito, 2008;Buchsbaum, Padmanabhan, & Berman, 2010;Acheson et al, 2011;Koenigs et al, 2011), phoneme sequencing (Gelfand & Bookheimer, 2003;Moser et al, 2009), translation of auditory to articulatory representations (Hickok & Poeppel, 2000;Papoutsi et al, 2009;Hickok, Houde, & Rong, 2011;Peschke, Ziegler, Eisenberger, & Baumgaertner, 2012), stimulus-driven attention (Downar, Crawley, Mikulis, & Davis, 2001;Ravizza, Hazeltine, Ruiz, & Zhu, 2011;Cabeza, Ciaramelli, & Moscovitch, 2012) and auditory processing for speech (posterior superior temporal cortex).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

tDCS to temporoparietal cortex during familiarisation enhances the subsequent phonological coherence of nonwords in immediate serial recall

Savill

Ashton

Gugliuzza

et al. 2015

Cortex

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

et al. (4 more authors) (2015) tDCS to temporoparietal cortex during familiarisation enhances the subsequent phonological coherence of nonwords in immediate serial recall. Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior. pp. 132-144. ISSN 1973-8102 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2014.08.018 eprints@whiterose.ac.uk https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. TakedownIf you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing eprints@whiterose.ac.uk including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. that any effects were due to the influence of tDCS on long-term learning and not a direct consequence of short-term changes in neural excitability. We found that only a few exposures to the phonological forms of nonwords were sufficient to enhance nonword ISR overall compared to entirely novel items. Anodal tDCS during familiarisation further enhanced the acquisition of phonological forms, producing a specific reduction in the frequency of phoneme migrations when sequences of nonwords were maintained in verbal short-term memory. More of the phonemes that were recalled were bound together as a whole correct nonword following tDCS. These data show that tDCS to left temporoparietal cortex can facilitate word learning by strengthening the acquisition of long-term phonological forms, irrespective of the availability of a concrete referent, and that the consequences of this learning can be seen beyond the learning task as strengthened phonological coherence in verbal short-term memory.

show abstract

Physiological Basis of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

Cited by 1,417 publications

References 135 publications

Effects of transcranial direct-current stimulation on laparoscopic surgical skill acquisition

Effects of transcranial direct-current stimulation on laparoscopic surgical skill acquisition

Parietal Contributions to Visual Working Memory Depend on Task Difficulty

tDCS to temporoparietal cortex during familiarisation enhances the subsequent phonological coherence of nonwords in immediate serial recall

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About