This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1545968308322842v1 23/4/373    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Rothkegel, H. Articles by Paulus, W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Rothkegel, H. Articles by Paulus, W. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Training Effects Outweigh Effects of Single-Session Conventional rTMS and Theta Burst Stimulation in PD Patients

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: hrothke{at}gwdg.de.

	Abstract

Background. Focal single-session repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the primary motor cortex has been claimed to be capable of improving motor function in Parkinson’s disease. Objective. The authors sought to determine which type of rTMS protocol holds the highest potential for future therapeutic application. Methods. Twenty-two patients with Parkinson’s disease received 5 different rTMS protocols on 5 consecutive days in a pseudorandomized and counterbalanced order either in the defined OFF condition or with their usual medication. The protocols tested in the present study included 2 conventional rTMS protocols (0.5 and 10 Hz) as well as the recently introduced theta burst stimulation (cTBS, iTBS) and a sham condition. Cortical excitability, motor performance (pointing movement, pronation-supination, Purdue Pegboard Test, walking), and mood were assessed before and after each session. Results. The authors observed motor training from days 1 to 4, particularly in the group on dopaminergic medication. None of the rTMS paradigms excelled placebo stimulation. The only exception was the Purdue Pegboard Test, in which all active stimulation paradigms yielded slightly stronger effects than sham stimulation. Conclusions. Within a single session, no clinically relevant difference in the rTMS protocols could be detected. Training effects outweigh and may have masked rTMS effects, particularly in the group on dopaminergic mediation.

First published on October 31, 2008, doi:10.1177/1545968308322842

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2009;23:373.

A more recent version of this article appeared on May 1, 2009


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?