Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1995 Apr;97(2):114-25.
doi: 10.1016/0924-980x(94)00310-4.

Modulation of motor activity by cutaneous input: inhibition of the magnetic motor evoked potential by digital electrical stimulation

Affiliations

Modulation of motor activity by cutaneous input: inhibition of the magnetic motor evoked potential by digital electrical stimulation

P D Clouston et al. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1995 Apr.

Abstract

We examined the inhibitory effect of a brief train of digital (D2) electrical stimuli at 4 times perception threshold on transcranial magnetic motor evoked potentials (MEPs) recorded from abductor pollicis brevis (APB) and flexor carpi radialis (FCR) muscles ipsilateral to the side of D2 stimulation. We compared this to the inhibitory effect of ipsilateral D2 stimulation on averaged rectified EMG recorded at 10% maximum voluntary contraction and on F-responses and H-reflexes recorded from these same muscles. We also compared MEPs recorded following D2 stimulation just above perception threshold to MEPs following higher intensity D2 stimulation. As well, we assessed the effect of preceding D2 stimulation on MEPs recorded from a relaxed versus tonically contracted hand muscle. D2 stimulation elicited a triphasic response of modest MEP facilitation followed by inhibition and further facilitation. The duration and onset of MEP inhibition correlated with those of the initial period of rectified EMG inhibition, however, the magnitude of MEP inhibition was generally less than the magnitude of EMG inhibition, consistent with a greater inhibitory effect of digital afferents on smaller motor neurons. MEPs were not facilitated during the rebound of EMG activity (the E2 period) that usually followed the initial period of EMG inhibition (I1 period). The behavior of H-reflexes and F-responses following ipsilateral D2 stimulation suggested that inhibition of both EMG and MEPs is not mediated via presynaptic inhibition of Ia afferents, and that inhibition is augmented by descending rather than segmental input to spinal motor neurons. Tonic contraction of the target muscle during D2 stimulation decreased the inhibitory effect of the preceding digital stimulus possibly due to recruitment of larger spinal motor neurons less likely to be inhibited by cutaneous input.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources