Placebo effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor skill acquisition.

Nicole K Haikalis, Andrew Hooyman, Peiyuan Wang, Ayoub Daliri, Sydney Y Schaefer
Author Information
  1. Nicole K Haikalis: School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
  2. Andrew Hooyman: School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
  3. Peiyuan Wang: School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
  4. Ayoub Daliri: Department of Speech and Hearing Science, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
  5. Sydney Y Schaefer: School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA. Electronic address: sydney.schaefer@asu.edu.

Abstract

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique used in neurorehabilitation to enhance motor training. However, its benefits to motor training can be difficult to reproduce across research studies. It is possible that the observed benefits of tDCS are not directly related to the intervention itself but rather to the brain-mind responses elicited by the treatment context, commonly known as a placebo effect. This study investigated the presence of a placebo effect of tDCS on motor training and explored potential underlying factors. Sixty-eight participants who were right-handed were randomly assigned to active tDCS, sham tDCS, or a no-stimulation control group. Double-blind active or sham tDCS was applied to the right primary motor cortex, while the unblinded control group received no stimulation. All participants completed 30 training trials of a functional upper-extremity motor task. Participants' beliefs of tDCS, along with their prior knowledge of tDCS, were also collected. There was no significant difference in the amount of improvement on the motor task between the active and sham tDCS groups; however, both active and sham tDCS groups improved more than the control group, indicating a placebo effect. More motor task improvement was also associated with higher beliefs of tDCS (regardless of whether active or sham tDCS was received). This demonstrates a measurable placebo effect of tDCS on motor training, driven at least in part by treatment expectations or beliefs. Future tDCS studies should control for beliefs and other placebo-related factors.

Keywords

References

  1. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2019 Mar 4;16(1):34 [PMID: 30832684]
  2. Psychother Psychosom. 2018;87(4):204-210 [PMID: 29895014]
  3. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2000 Jun;31(2):73-86 [PMID: 11132119]
  4. Front Psychol. 2014 Oct 01;5:1079 [PMID: 25324797]
  5. Brain Stimul. 2021 May-Jun;14(3):500-502 [PMID: 33722659]
  6. Neuron. 2014 May 21;82(4):731-6 [PMID: 24853934]
  7. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl. 1999;52:3-6 [PMID: 10590970]
  8. Brain. 2005 Mar;128(Pt 3):490-9 [PMID: 15634731]
  9. Front Psychiatry. 2020 Aug 07;11:801 [PMID: 32848956]
  10. Cortex. 2014 Aug;57:51-9 [PMID: 24769545]
  11. Clin Neurophysiol. 2015 Nov;126(11):2181-8 [PMID: 25922128]
  12. Front Rehabil Sci. 2021 Oct 22;2:754118 [PMID: 36188810]
  13. Br J Pain. 2022 Feb;16(1):60-70 [PMID: 35111315]
  14. Eur J Neurosci. 2021 Apr;53(8):2655-2668 [PMID: 33587782]
  15. Prog Brain Res. 2021;262:225-244 [PMID: 33931181]
  16. Neurosci Lett. 2006 Aug 14;404(1-2):232-6 [PMID: 16808997]
  17. Sci Rep. 2021 Apr 7;11(1):7659 [PMID: 33828202]
  18. Front Psychiatry. 2019 Oct 25;10:721 [PMID: 31708807]
  19. Laterality. 2014;19(2):164-77 [PMID: 23659650]
  20. Neurosci Lett. 2014 Apr 3;564:6-10 [PMID: 24508704]
  21. Brain Stimul. 2021 Jan-Feb;14(1):100-109 [PMID: 33197654]
  22. J Mot Behav. 2012;44(5):313-27 [PMID: 22934682]
  23. Eur J Neurosci. 2021 Apr;53(8):2696-2702 [PMID: 33259084]
  24. Exp Brain Res. 2016 Jan;234(1):229-40 [PMID: 26438508]
  25. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2021 Jun 3;18(1):94 [PMID: 34082761]
  26. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2020 Nov 17;17(1):151 [PMID: 33203416]
  27. Eur J Neurosci. 2018 Dec;48(11):3410-3425 [PMID: 30362195]
  28. Front Neurosci. 2019 Nov 13;13:1212 [PMID: 31798402]
  29. J Physiol. 2000 Sep 15;527 Pt 3:633-9 [PMID: 10990547]
  30. Behav Brain Res. 2012 Mar 1;228(1):219-31 [PMID: 22142953]
  31. Neuropsychologia. 2015 Jan;66:213-36 [PMID: 25448853]
  32. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2020;153:27-47 [PMID: 32563291]
  33. Neuroscience. 2015 May 21;294:51-9 [PMID: 25772792]
  34. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2018;138:xv-xx [PMID: 29681338]
  35. Neuropsychologia. 1971 Mar;9(1):97-113 [PMID: 5146491]
  36. Curr Opin Neurol. 2011 Dec;24(6):590-6 [PMID: 21968548]
  37. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2022 Aug;88(8):3638-3656 [PMID: 35384004]
  38. Brain Stimul. 2014 Jul-Aug;7(4):623-4 [PMID: 24810955]
  39. N Engl J Med. 2020 Feb 6;382(6):554-561 [PMID: 32023375]
  40. Brain Sci. 2021 Nov 18;11(11): [PMID: 34827526]
  41. Front Neurosci. 2019 Jan 07;12:999 [PMID: 30666182]
  42. J Neurosci. 2011 Nov 9;31(45):16117-24 [PMID: 22072664]
  43. Exp Brain Res. 2016 Sep;234(9):2629-42 [PMID: 27150317]
  44. Front Psychiatry. 2012 Nov 02;3:93 [PMID: 23130002]
  45. Physiol Rev. 2013 Jul;93(3):1207-46 [PMID: 23899563]
  46. Neuropsychologia. 2018 Oct;119:524-534 [PMID: 30227147]
  47. J Alzheimers Dis. 2020;77(1):53-58 [PMID: 32651327]
  48. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2015 Jul;16(7):403-18 [PMID: 26087681]
  49. Front Neurosci. 2017 Nov 22;11:641 [PMID: 29213226]
  50. Sci Rep. 2020 Nov 23;10(1):20353 [PMID: 33230290]
  51. Appetite. 2019 May 1;136:1-7 [PMID: 30611756]
  52. PLoS One. 2022 Sep 22;17(9):e0274955 [PMID: 36137126]

Grants

  1. P30 AG072980/NIA NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Humans
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
Motor Skills
Placebo Effect
Brain
Upper Extremity
Double-Blind Method

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0tDCSmotorstimulationtrainingeffectactiveshamplacebocontrolbeliefsdirectcurrentgrouptaskTranscranialbenefitsstudiestreatmentfactorsparticipantsreceivedalsoimprovementgroupsPlaceboacquisitionMotornon-invasivebraintechniqueusedneurorehabilitationenhanceHowevercandifficultreproduceacrossresearchpossibleobserveddirectlyrelatedinterventionratherbrain-mindresponseselicitedcontextcommonlyknownstudyinvestigatedpresenceexploredpotentialunderlyingSixty-eightright-handedrandomlyassignedno-stimulationDouble-blindappliedrightprimarycortexunblindedcompleted30trialsfunctionalupper-extremityParticipants'alongpriorknowledgecollectedsignificantdifferenceamounthoweverimprovedindicatingassociatedhigherregardlesswhetherdemonstratesmeasurabledrivenleastpartexpectationsFutureplacebo-relatedeffectstranscranialskilllearningUpper-extremity

Similar Articles

Cited By