TMS-based Assessment of Mental Training Effects on Motor Learning in Healthy Participants

Motor Learning Clinical Trial

— IMAP-TMS  

Official title:

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation-based Assessment of Mental Training Effects on Motor Learning in Healthy Participants

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Not yet recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT04784832
• Other study ID #: C19-19
• Secondary ID: 2020-A00305-34 /
• Status: Not yet recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: December 2023
• Est. completion date: November 2028

Study information

• Verified date: December 2023
• Source: Institut National de la Santé Et de la Recherche Médicale, France
• Contact: Florent Lebon, PhD
• Phone: +33 3 80 39 67 49
• Email: florent.lebon[@]u-bourgogne.fr
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The general purpose of this research project is to analyze the specific role of motor imagery on motor learning, assessed through corticospinal excitability measurements and behavioral data collection. This project is based on four sequences. For Sequence 1, the main objective is to examine the effect of mental training on movement speed and accuracy in a manual motor sequence task, as well as the influence of sensory feedback in immediate post-test (i.e., execution of a similar, but not identical, manual motor sequence, other manual tasks) on performance in delayed post-test. The secondary objective will be to examine corticospinal changes (i.e., amplitude of motor evoked potentials) induced by mental training, by measuring the amplitude of motor evoked potentials before and after mental training. For Sequence 2, the main objective is to examine the impact of a motor disturbance induced by a robotic arm at different intervals during the motor imagery process. The secondary objective will be to examine the corticospinal changes (i.e. amplitude of evoked motor potentials) induced by mental training as a function of the applied perturbations, before and after perturbation. For Sequence 3, the main objective will be to examine the influence of neuroplasticity on the quality of mental training. More specifically, the investigators will study the links between brain plasticity and motor learning through mental training. The secondary objective will be to examine the corticospinal changes (i.e. amplitude of evoked motor potentials) induced by mental training at different levels of the neuromuscular system (cortical, cervicomedullar, peripheral) after a training period. For Sequence 4, the main objective will be to examine the effect of short-term arm-immobilization of on the retention of motor learning induced by mental training. The secondary objective will be to examine the corticospinal changes (i.e., amplitude of motor evoked potentials) induced by of short-term arm-immobilization, or by transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), on motor learning. The results of this fundamental research project will allow a better understanding of neurophysiological and behavioral mechanisms that underlie motor learning through motor imagery. The results will allow to efficiently consider inter-individual specificities and will thus open up to clinical research perspectives, towards the establishment of adapted motor rehabilitation protocols.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Not yet recruiting
• Enrollment: 556
• Est. completion date: November 2028
• Est. primary completion date: November 2028
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 60 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Male or female between 18 and 60 years old

• Having given written informed consent

• Affiliated to a social security scheme

Exclusion Criteria:

• History of psychiatric illness (declarative)

• Person under guardianship, curatorship, safeguard of justice

• Neurological problem that could bias the results of the study (declarative)

• Personal or family history of epilepsy

• Person deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision

• Person hospitalized without consent and not subject to legal protection, and person admitted to a health or social institution for purposes other than that of the research

• Person subject to an exclusion period for another research

• Pregnant women or women of childbearing age not using known contraception

• Breastfeeding women

• Person on medication that could influence neurophysiological measures (neuroleptics, anxiolytics, antidepressants)

• Person carrying :

• pacemaker or other device that could interfere with the magnetic field

• Implants (mechanical or electronic: cochlear implants, neural or cardiac pacemakers, infusion pumps, magnetic aneurysm clips, etc.)

• Metallic foreign bodies in the eye or nervous system

• Metallic objects (tattoos, piercings, etc.)

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Motor Learning

Intervention

Device:
• Transcranial magnetic stimulation
Magnetic stimulation of the cortex
• Peripheral Nerve Stimulation
Electric stimulation of the nerves
• Transcranial direct current stimulation
Electric stimulation of the cortex
• Paired Associative Stimulation
Combined magnetic and electric stimulation of cortex and nerve, respectively
• Wrist
Short-term immobilization of the arm
• Robotic arm
External perturbation of force field induced by robotic arm
• Cervicomedullar stimulation
Electric stimulation of the muscle

Other:
• Physical training
Training to perform the task by actually doing the task
• Mental training
Training to perform the task by imaging doing the task

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
France	INSERM - U1093 Cognition, Action, and Sensorimotor Plasticity	Dijon

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Institut National de la Santé Et de la Recherche Médicale, France

Country where clinical trial is conducted

France, 

References & Publications (35)

Abraham WC. Metaplasticity: tuning synapses and networks for plasticity. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008 May;9(5):387. doi: 10.1038/nrn2356. — View Citation

Allami N, Paulignan Y, Brovelli A, Boussaoud D. Visuo-motor learning with combination of different rates of motor imagery and physical practice. Exp Brain Res. 2008 Jan;184(1):105-13. doi: 10.1007/s00221-007-1086-x. Epub 2007 Sep 12. — View Citation

Anwar MN, Khan SH. Trial-by-trial adaptation of movements during mental practice under force field. Comput Math Methods Med. 2013;2013:109497. doi: 10.1155/2013/109497. Epub 2013 May 7. — View Citation

Arora S, Aggarwal R, Sevdalis N, Moran A, Sirimanna P, Kneebone R, Darzi A. Development and validation of mental practice as a training strategy for laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2010 Jan;24(1):179-87. doi: 10.1007/s00464-009-0624-y. Epub 2009 Jul 25. — View Citation

Avanzino L, Giannini A, Tacchino A, Pelosin E, Ruggeri P, Bove M. Motor imagery influences the execution of repetitive finger opposition movements. Neurosci Lett. 2009 Nov 27;466(1):11-5. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2009.09.036. Epub 2009 Sep 20. — View Citation

Bienenstock EL, Cooper LN, Munro PW. Theory for the development of neuron selectivity: orientation specificity and binocular interaction in visual cortex. J Neurosci. 1982 Jan;2(1):32-48. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.02-01-00032.1982. — View Citation

Burianova H, Marstaller L, Sowman P, Tesan G, Rich AN, Williams M, Savage G, Johnson BW. Multimodal functional imaging of motor imagery using a novel paradigm. Neuroimage. 2013 May 1;71:50-8. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.01.001. Epub 2013 Jan 12. — View Citation

Cantarero G, Tang B, O'Malley R, Salas R, Celnik P. Motor learning interference is proportional to occlusion of LTP-like plasticity. J Neurosci. 2013 Mar 13;33(11):4634-41. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4706-12.2013. — View Citation

Classen J, Liepert J, Wise SP, Hallett M, Cohen LG. Rapid plasticity of human cortical movement representation induced by practice. J Neurophysiol. 1998 Feb;79(2):1117-23. doi: 10.1152/jn.1998.79.2.1117. — View Citation

Cumming J, Hall C. Deliberate imagery practice: the development of imagery skills in competitive athletes. J Sports Sci. 2002 Feb;20(2):137-45. doi: 10.1080/026404102317200846. — View Citation

Decety J. The neurophysiological basis of motor imagery. Behav Brain Res. 1996 May;77(1-2):45-52. doi: 10.1016/0166-4328(95)00225-1. — View Citation

Doyon J, Bellec P, Amsel R, Penhune V, Monchi O, Carrier J, Lehericy S, Benali H. Contributions of the basal ganglia and functionally related brain structures to motor learning. Behav Brain Res. 2009 Apr 12;199(1):61-75. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.11.012. Epub 2008 Nov 17. — View Citation

Doyon J, Benali H. Reorganization and plasticity in the adult brain during learning of motor skills. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2005 Apr;15(2):161-7. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2005.03.004. — View Citation

Gentili R, Han CE, Schweighofer N, Papaxanthis C. Motor learning without doing: trial-by-trial improvement in motor performance during mental training. J Neurophysiol. 2010 Aug;104(2):774-83. doi: 10.1152/jn.00257.2010. Epub 2010 Jun 10. — View Citation

Gentili R, Papaxanthis C, Pozzo T. Improvement and generalization of arm motor performance through motor imagery practice. Neuroscience. 2006 Feb;137(3):761-72. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.10.013. Epub 2005 Dec 9. — View Citation

Grush R. The emulation theory of representation: motor control, imagery, and perception. Behav Brain Sci. 2004 Jun;27(3):377-96; discussion 396-442. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x04000093. — View Citation

Guillot A, Moschberger K, Collet C. Coupling movement with imagery as a new perspective for motor imagery practice. Behav Brain Funct. 2013 Feb 20;9:8. doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-9-8. — View Citation

Halsband U, Lange RK. Motor learning in man: a review of functional and clinical studies. J Physiol Paris. 2006 Jun;99(4-6):414-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jphysparis.2006.03.007. Epub 2006 May 26. — View Citation

Izawa J, Shadmehr R. Learning from sensory and reward prediction errors during motor adaptation. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011 Mar;7(3):e1002012. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002012. Epub 2011 Mar 10. — View Citation

Jeannerod M. Neural simulation of action: a unifying mechanism for motor cognition. Neuroimage. 2001 Jul;14(1 Pt 2):S103-9. doi: 10.1006/nimg.2001.0832. — View Citation

Karni A, Meyer G, Jezzard P, Adams MM, Turner R, Ungerleider LG. Functional MRI evidence for adult motor cortex plasticity during motor skill learning. Nature. 1995 Sep 14;377(6545):155-8. doi: 10.1038/377155a0. — View Citation

Keller PE. Mental imagery in music performance: underlying mechanisms and potential benefits. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2012 Apr;1252:206-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06439.x. — View Citation

Lebon F, Lotze M, Stinear CM, Byblow WD. Task-dependent interaction between parietal and contralateral primary motor cortex during explicit versus implicit motor imagery. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37850. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037850. Epub 2012 May 31. — View Citation

Lehericy S, Benali H, Van de Moortele PF, Pelegrini-Issac M, Waechter T, Ugurbil K, Doyon J. Distinct basal ganglia territories are engaged in early and advanced motor sequence learning. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Aug 30;102(35):12566-71. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0502762102. Epub 2005 Aug 17. — View Citation

Malouin F, Jackson PL, Richards CL. Towards the integration of mental practice in rehabilitation programs. A critical review. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013 Sep 19;7:576. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00576. — View Citation

Minkova L, Peter J, Abdulkadir A, Schumacher LV, Kaller CP, Nissen C, Kloppel S, Lahr J. Determinants of Inter-Individual Variability in Corticomotor Excitability Induced by Paired Associative Stimulation. Front Neurosci. 2019 Aug 14;13:841. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2019.00841. eCollection 2019. — View Citation

Mulder T. Motor imagery and action observation: cognitive tools for rehabilitation. J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2007;114(10):1265-78. doi: 10.1007/s00702-007-0763-z. Epub 2007 Jun 20. — View Citation

Opie GM, Evans A, Ridding MC, Semmler JG. Short-term immobilization influences use-dependent cortical plasticity and fine motor performance. Neuroscience. 2016 Aug 25;330:247-56. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2016.06.002. Epub 2016 Jun 6. — View Citation

Palmiero M, Belardinelli MO, Nardo D, Sestieri C, Di Matteo R, D'Ausilio A, Romani GL. Mental imagery generation in different modalities activates sensory-motor areas. Cogn Process. 2009 Sep;10 Suppl 2:S268-71. doi: 10.1007/s10339-009-0324-5. No abstract available. — View Citation

Rosenkranz K, Seibel J, Kacar A, Rothwell J. Sensorimotor deprivation induces interdependent changes in excitability and plasticity of the human hand motor cortex. J Neurosci. 2014 May 21;34(21):7375-82. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5139-13.2014. — View Citation

Rozand V, Lebon F, Stapley PJ, Papaxanthis C, Lepers R. A prolonged motor imagery session alter imagined and actual movement durations: Potential implications for neurorehabilitation. Behav Brain Res. 2016 Jan 15;297:67-75. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2015.09.036. Epub 2015 Sep 30. — View Citation

Ruffino C, Papaxanthis C, Lebon F. The influence of imagery capacity in motor performance improvement. Exp Brain Res. 2017 Oct;235(10):3049-3057. doi: 10.1007/s00221-017-5039-8. Epub 2017 Jul 21. — View Citation

Rulleau T, Robin N, Abou-Dest A, Chesnet D, Toussaint L. Does the Improvement of Position Sense Following Motor Imagery Practice Vary as a Function of Age and Time of Day? Exp Aging Res. 2018 Oct-Dec;44(5):443-454. doi: 10.1080/0361073X.2018.1521496. Epub 2018 Oct 9. — View Citation

Saimpont A, Mercier C, Malouin F, Guillot A, Collet C, Doyon J, Jackson PL. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation enhances the effects of motor imagery training in a finger tapping task. Eur J Neurosci. 2016 Jan;43(1):113-9. doi: 10.1111/ejn.13122. Epub 2015 Dec 15. — View Citation

Schuster C, Hilfiker R, Amft O, Scheidhauer A, Andrews B, Butler J, Kischka U, Ettlin T. Best practice for motor imagery: a systematic literature review on motor imagery training elements in five different disciplines. BMC Med. 2011 Jun 17;9:75. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-9-75. — View Citation

* Note: There are 35 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Evolution of movement speed - Sequence 1	The duration of performed movement sequences	Each day in Sequence 1 (Sequence 1 is 11 days)
Primary	Evolution of movement accuracy - Sequence 1	The accuracy of performed movement sequences (i.e., the correspondence between the performed finger motor sequences and the requested finger motor sequence).	Each day in Sequence 1 (Sequence 1 is 11 days)
Primary	Evolution of trajectory error - Sequence 2	The area under the curve of hand's trajectory according to the straight line joining the starting target and the final target.	Each day in Sequence 2 (Sequence 1 is 10 days)
Primary	Evolution of maximal deviation - Sequence 2	The maximal perpendicular distance between the position of the hand and the straight line joining the starting target and the final target	Each day in Sequence 2 (Sequence 1 is 10 days)
Primary	Evolution of final error - Sequence 2	The distance between the final position of the hand and the position of the final target.	Each day in Sequence 2 (Sequence 1 is 10 days)
Primary	Evolution of movement speed - Sequence 3	The duration of performed movement sequences	Each day from day 2 to day 11 of Sequence 3 (Sequence 3 is 11 days)
Primary	Evolution of movement accuracy - Sequence 3	The accuracy of performed movement sequences (i.e., the correspondence between the performed finger motor sequences and the requested finger motor sequence).	Each day from day 2 to day 11 of Sequence 3 (Sequence 3 is 11 days)
Primary	Evolution of movement speed - Sequence 4	The duration of performed movement sequences	Each day in Sequence 4 (Sequence 4 is 6 days)
Primary	Evolution of movement accuracy - Sequence 4	The accuracy of performed movement sequences (i.e., the correspondence between the performed finger motor sequences and the requested finger motor sequence).	Each day in Sequence 4 (Sequence 4 is 6 days)
Secondary	Evolution of motor evoked potentials amplitude - Sequence 1	Peak-to-peak amplitude of motor evoked potentials	Day 1, 5, 6, 10 and 11 in Sequence 1 (Sequence 1 is 11 days).
Secondary	Evolution of motor evoked potentials amplitude - Sequence 2	Peak-to-peak amplitude of motor evoked potentials	Each day in Sequence 2 (Sequence 2 is 10 days)
Secondary	Evolution of motor evoked potentials amplitude - Sequence 3	Peak-to-peak amplitude of motor evoked potentials	Day 1, 5, 6, 10 and 11 in Sequence 3 (Sequence 1 is 11 days)
Secondary	Evolution of motor evoked potentials amplitude - Sequence 4	Peak-to-peak amplitude of motor evoked potentials	Days 1, 5, and 6 in Sequence 4 (Sequence 4 is 6 days)