4.3 Article

'Expedited Interhemispheric Inhibition': A Simple Method to Collect Additional IHI Data in the Same Amount of Time

Journal

BRAIN TOPOGRAPHY
Volume 34, Issue 1, Pages 1-5

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10548-020-00800-6

Keywords

Interhemispheric inhibition; Transcranial magnetic stimulation; Motor evoked potential; Conditioning stimulus

Funding

  1. School of Psychology, Deakin University
  2. Dystonia Medical Research Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that MEPs evoked from inhibitory stimuli can be used as non-conditioned responses, expediting IHI data collection without the need for additional TMS pulses. This approach allows for more IHI data to be collected in the same amount of time.
Interhemispheric inhibition (IHI) is a dual-site TMS protocol measuring inhibitory interactions between the primary motor cortices (M1). IHI is performed by applying an initial conditioning stimulus followed by a test stimulus to the contralateral M1. Conventionally, the response in the contralateral hand to the conditioning TMS pulse is either not measured, or discarded. The aim of this experiment was to investigate whether MEPs evoked from these conditioning stimuli can be utilised as non-conditioned, or 'baseline', responses, and therefore expedite IHI data collection. We evaluated short-latency (10 ms) and long-latency (40 ms) IHI bidirectionally in 14 healthy participants. There was no difference in MEP amplitudes evoked by conventional single TMS pulses randomly inserted into IHI blocks, and those evoked by the conditioning stimulus. Nor was there any significant difference in IHI magnitude when using single pulse MEPs or conditioning stimulus MEPs as baseline responses. The utilisation of conditioning stimuli dispenses with the need to insert dedicated single TMS pulses into IHI blocks, allowing for additional IHI data to be collected in the same amount of time.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available