Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Study protocol

Concurrent transcranial direct current stimulation and progressive resistance training in Parkinson’s disease: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Authors: Ashlee M. Hendy, Alex Tillman, Timo Rantalainen, Makii Muthalib, Liam Johnson, Dawson J. Kidgell, Daniel Wundersitz, Peter G. Enticott, Wei-Peng Teo

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Parkinson’s disease (PD) results from a loss of dopamine in the brain, leading to movement dysfunctions such as bradykinesia, postural instability, resting tremor and muscle rigidity. Furthermore, dopamine deficiency in PD has been shown to result in maladaptive plasticity of the primary motor cortex (M1). Progressive resistance training (PRT) is a popular intervention in PD that improves muscular strength and results in clinically significant improvements on the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). In separate studies, the application of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) to the M1 has been shown to improve motor function in PD; however, the combined use of tDCS and PRT has not been investigated.

Methods/design

We propose a 6-week, double-blind randomised controlled trial combining M1 tDCS and PRT of the lower body in participants (n = 42) with moderate PD (Hoehn and Yahr scale score 2–4). Supervised lower body PRT combined with functional balance tasks will be performed three times per week with concurrent a-tDCS delivered at 2 mA for 20 minutes (a-tDCS group) or with sham tDCS (sham group). Control participants will receive standard care (control group). Outcome measures will include functional strength, gait speed and variability, balance, neurophysiological function at rest and during movement execution, and the UPDRS motor subscale, measured at baseline, 3 weeks (during), 6 weeks (post), and 9 weeks (retention). Ethical approval has been granted by the Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (project number 2015-014), and the trial has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615001241527).

Discussion

This will be the first randomised controlled trial to combine PRT and a-tDCS targeting balance and gait in people with PD. The study will elucidate the functional, clinical and neurophysiological outcomes of combined PRT and a-tDCS. It is hypothesised that combined PRT and a-tDCS will significantly improve lower limb strength, postural sway, gait speed and stride variability compared with PRT with sham tDCS. Further, we hypothesise that pre-frontal cortex activation during dual-task cognitive and gait/balance activities will be reduced, and that M1 excitability and inhibition will be augmented, following the combined PRT and a-tDCS intervention.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12615001241​527. Registered on 12 November 2015.
Literature
1.
2.
Nussbaum RL, Ellis CE. Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1356–64.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Brozova H, Stochl J, Roth J, et al. Fear of falling has greater influence than other aspects of gait disorders on quality of life in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2009;30:453–7.PubMed
4.
Leroi I, Ahearn DJ, Andrews M, et al. Behavioural disorders, disability and quality of life in Parkinson’s disease. Age Ageing. 2011;40:614–21.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Tillman A, Muthalib M, Hendy AM, et al. Lower limb progressive resistance training improves leg strength but not gait speed or balance in Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Aging Neurosci. 2015;7:40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Hirsch MA, Toole T, Maitland CG, et al. The effects of balance training and high-intensity resistance training on persons with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:1109–17.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Leung M, Rantalainen T, Teo WP, et al. Motor cortex excitability is not differentially modulated following skill and strength training. Neuroscience. 2015;305:99–108.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Fisher BE, Wu AD, Salem GJ, et al. The effect of exercise training in improving motor performance and corticomotor excitability in people with early Parkinson’s disease. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:1221–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Lindenbach D, Bishop C. Critical involvement of the motor cortex in the pathophysiology and treatment of Parkinson’s disease. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2013;37:2737–50.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Ridding MC, Inzelberg R, Rothwell JC. Changes in excitability of motor cortical circuitry in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol. 1995;37:181–8.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Milanović S, Filipović SR, Radovanović S, et al. Changes in motor cortex excitability associated with muscle fatigue in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2013;70:298–303.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Lefaucheur JP. Motor cortex stimulation for Parkinson’s disease and dystonia: lessons from transcranial magnetic stimulation? A review of the literature [in French]. Rev Neurol. 2005;161:27–41.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Ueki Y, Mima T, Kotb MA, et al. Altered plasticity of the human motor cortex in Parkinson’s disease. Ann Neurol. 2006;59:60–71.CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Excitability changes induced in the human motor cortex by weak transcranial direct current stimulation. J Physiol. 2000;527:633–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Lang N, Siebner HR, Ward NS, et al. How does transcranial DC stimulation of the primary motor cortex alter regional neuronal activity in the human brain? Eur J Neurosci. 2005;22:495–504.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Reis J, Schambra HM, Cohen LG, et al. Noninvasive cortical stimulation enhances motor skill acquisition over multiple days through an effect on consolidation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106:1590–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Tanaka S, Hanakawa T, Honda M, et al. Enhancement of pinch force in the lower leg by anodal transcranial direct current stimulation. Exp Brain Res. 2009;196:459–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Stagg CJ, Jayaram G, Pastor D, et al. Polarity and timing-dependent effects of transcranial direct current stimulation in explicit motor learning. Neuropsychologia. 2011;49:800–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Boggio PS, Ferrucci R, Rigonatti SP, et al. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on working memory in patients with Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Sci. 2006;249:31–8.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Doruk D, Gray Z, Bravo GL, et al. Effects of tDCS on executive function in Parkinson’s disease. Neurosci Lett. 2014;582:27–31.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Benninger DH, Lomarev M, Lopez G, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2010;81:1105–11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Fregni F, Boggio PS, Santos MC, et al. Noninvasive cortical stimulation with transcranial direct current stimulation in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord. 2006;21:1693–702.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Kaski D, Dominguez RO, Allum JH, et al. Combining physical training with transcranial direct current stimulation to improve gait in Parkinson’s disease: a pilot randomized controlled study. Clin Rehabil. 2014;28:1115–24.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Hendy AM, Teo WP, Kidgell DJ. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation prolongs the cross-education of strength and corticomotor plasticity. Med Sci Sport Exerc. 2015;47:1788–97.CrossRef
26.
Hendy AM, Kidgell DJ. Anodal tDCS applied during strength training enhances motor cortical plasticity. Med Sci Sport Exerc. 2013;45:1721–9.CrossRef
27.
Rocha S, Silva E, Foerster A, et al. The impact of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) combined with modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) on upper limb function in chronic stroke: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Disabil Rehabil. 2016;38:653–60.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Fusco A, Iosa M, Venturiero V, et al. After vs. priming effects of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on upper extremity motor recovery in patients with subacute stroke. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2014;32:301–12.PubMed
29.
Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991;39:142–8.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Berg KO, Wood-Dauphinee SL, Williams JI, et al. Measuring balance in the elderly: validation of an instrument. Can J Public Health. 1992;83 Suppl 2:S7–11.PubMed
31.
La Porta F, Caselli S, Susassi S, et al. Is the Berg Balance Scale an internally valid and reliable measure of balance across different etiologies in neurorehabilitation? A revisited Rasch analysis study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:1209–16.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Csuka M, McCarty DJ. Simple method for measurement of lower extremity muscle strength. Am J Med. 1985;78:77–81.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Doheny EP, Walsh C, Foran T, et al. Falls classification using tri-axial accelerometers during the five-times-sit-to-stand test. Gait Posture. 2013;38:1021–5.CrossRefPubMed
34.
35.
Lord S, Howe T, Greenland J, et al. Gait variability in older adults: a structured review of testing protocol and clinimetric properties. Gait Posture. 2011;34:443–50.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Montero-Odasso M, Casas A, Hansen KT, et al. Quantitative gait analysis under dual-task in older people with mild cognitive impairment: a reliability study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2009;6:35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Bellanca JL, Lowry KA, Vanswearingen JM, et al. Harmonic ratios: a quantification of step to step symmetry. J Biomech. 2013;46:828–31.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Riva F, Bisi MC, Stagni R. Gait variability and stability measures: minimum number of strides and within-session reliability. Comput Biol Med. 2014;50:9–13.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Rogind H, Simonsen H, Era P, et al. Comparison of Kistler 9861A force platform and Chattecx Balance System for measurement of postural sway: correlation and test-retest reliability. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2003;13:106–14.CrossRefPubMed
40.
41.
Carroll TJ, Riek S, Carson RG. Reliability of the input-output properties of the cortico-spinal pathway obtained from transcranial magnetic and electrical stimulation. J Neurosci Methods. 2001;112:193–202.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Nutt JG, Horak FB, Bloem BR. Milestones in gait, balance, and falling. Mov Disord. 2011;26:1166–74.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Hausdorff JM, Doniger GM, Springer S, et al. A common cognitive profile in elderly fallers and in patients with Parkinson’s disease: the prominence of impaired executive function and attention. Exp Aging Res. 2006;32:411–29.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
44.
Kudlicka A, Clare L, Hindle JV. Executive functions in Parkinson’s disease: systematic review and meta-analysis. Mov Disord. 2011;26:2305–15.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Williams-Gray CH, Evans JR, Goris A, et al. The distinct cognitive syndromes of Parkinson’s disease: 5 year follow-up of the CamPaIGN cohort. Brain. 2009;132:2958–69.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Kelly VE, Eusterbrock AJ, Shumway-Cook A. A review of dual-task walking deficits in people with Parkinson’s disease: motor and cognitive contributions, mechanisms, and clinical implications. Parkinsons Dis. 2012;2012:918719.PubMed
47.
48.
49.
50.
Steinbrink J, Villringer A, Kempf F, et al. Illuminating the BOLD signal: combined fMRI-fNIRS studies. Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;24:495–505.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Cui X, Bray S, Bryant DM, et al. A quantitative comparison of NIRS and fMRI across multiple cognitive tasks. Neuroimage. 2011;54:2808–21.CrossRefPubMed
52.
53.
Atsumori H, Kiguchi M, Katura T, et al. Noninvasive imaging of prefrontal activation during attention-demanding tasks performed while walking using a wearable optical topography system. J Biomed Opt. 2010;15:046002.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Holtzer R, Mahoney JR, Izzetoglu M, et al. Online fronto-cortical control of simple and attention-demanding locomotion in humans. Neuroimage. 2015;112:152–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
55.
Mirelman A, Maidan I, Bernad-Elazari H, et al. Increased frontal brain activation during walking while dual tasking: an fNIRS study in healthy young adults. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014;11:85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
56.
Okamoto M, Dan H, Sakamoto K, et al. Three-dimensional probabilistic anatomical cranio-cerebral correlation via the international 10–20 system oriented for transcranial functional brain mapping. Neuroimage. 2004;21:99–111.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Maidan I, Bernad-Elazari H, Gazit E, et al. Increased activation of the frontal lobe is associated with freezing of gait in patients with Parkinson’s disease: an fNIRS study. Mov Disord. 2015;28:324–24.
58.
Sakatani K, Yamashita D, Yamanaka T, et al. Changes of cerebral blood oxygenation and optical pathlength during activation and deactivation in the prefrontal cortex measured by time-resolved near infrared spectroscopy. Life Sci. 2006;78:2734–41.CrossRefPubMed
59.
Scholkmann F, Spichtig S, Muehlemann T, et al. How to detect and reduce movement artifacts in near-infrared imaging using moving standard deviation and spline interpolation. Physiol Meas. 2010;31:649–62.CrossRefPubMed
60.
61.
Shulman LM, Gruber-Baldini AL, Anderson KE, et al. The clinically important difference on the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale. Arch Neurol. 2010;67(1):64–70.CrossRefPubMed
62.
Schafer JL. Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press; 1997.CrossRef
63.
White IR, Horton NJ, Carpenter J, Pocock SJ. Strategy for intention to treat analysis in randomised trials with missing outcome data. BMJ. 2011;342:d40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
64.
White IR, Carpenter J, Evans S, Schroter S. Eliciting and using expert opinions about dropout bias in randomized controlled trials. Clin Trials. 2007;4(2):125–39.CrossRefPubMed
65.
Bloem BR, Grimbergen YA, Cramer M, et al. Prospective assessment of falls in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol. 2001;248:950–8.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Ashburn A, Stack E, Pickering RM, et al. Predicting fallers in a community-based sample of people with Parkinson’s disease. Gerontology. 2001;47:277–81.CrossRefPubMed
67.
Temlett JA, Thompson PD. Reasons for admission to hospital for Parkinson’s disease. Intern Med J. 2006;36:524–6.CrossRefPubMed
68.
Metadata
Title
Concurrent transcranial direct current stimulation and progressive resistance training in Parkinson’s disease: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Authors
Ashlee M. Hendy
Alex Tillman
Timo Rantalainen
Makii Muthalib
Liam Johnson
Dawson J. Kidgell
Daniel Wundersitz
Peter G. Enticott
Wei-Peng Teo
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1461-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Trials 1/2016 Go to the issue

Study protocol

The clinical and cost effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy plus treatment as usual for the treatment of depression in advanced cancer (CanTalk): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Erratum

Erratum to: ‘Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a patient-initiated botulinum toxin treatment model for blepharospasm and hemifacial spasm compared to standard care: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial’

Research

Varied flushing frequency and volume to prevent peripheral intravenous catheter failure: a pilot, factorial randomised controlled trial in adult medical-surgical hospital patients

Study protocol

Baclofen to prevent agitation in alcohol-addicted patients in the ICU: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Study protocol

The combination effects of body acupuncture and auricular acupressure compared to sham acupuncture for body weight control: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Pressure RElieving Support SUrfaces: a Randomised Evaluation 2 (PRESSURE 2): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial