Volume 13 - Articles-1402                   MEJDS (2023) 13: 102 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Nasiri S, Shahbazi M, Tahmasebi Broujeni S, Saeidmanesh M. Investigating the Effect of Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation in the Primary Motor Cortex on the Speed of Hand Preference Transfer in Children with Learning Disability in Overt and Covert Learning Conditions. MEJDS 2023; 13 :102-102
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-2816-en.html
Investigating the Effect of Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation in the Primary Motor Cortex on the Speed of Hand Preference Transfer in Children with Learning Disability in Overt and Covert Learning Conditions
Susan Nasiri1 , Mehdi Shahbazi *1 , Shahzad Tahmasebi Broujeni1 , Mohsen Saeidmanesh2
1- Department of Motor Behavior, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Psychology, Science and Arts University, Yazd, Iran
Abstract:   (980 Views)

Abstract
Background & Objectives: A learning disability is a developmental neurological disorder of biological origin, causing abnormalities at the cognitive level. Psychomotor development relies on the organization of the body program, body balance, and lateral superiority. Motor skills play a significant role in children's learning and development of academic and social skills. Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation (tDCS) of the brain, a noninvasive technique, is used to treat neurological and psychiatric disorders. The portable tDCS is a wearable brain stimulation technique that delivers a low electric current to the scalp. tDCS neuromodulation technique produces immediate and lasting changes in brain function. This study aimed to investigate the effect of tDCS in the primary motor cortex on the speed of hand preference transfer in children with learning disabilities in overt and covert learning conditions.
Methods: The current research method was quasi-experimental with a pretest-posttest design and a control group. The study population comprised 220 children with learning disabilities referred to the Yazd Education District clinics, in Yazd City, Iran. The study sample included 60 right-handed children with learning disabilities, aged 9-12 years. The subjects were randomly divided into four groups of 15 students. Thirty children were randomly placed in two groups of 15: explicit learning intervention and explicit learning control. Similarly, 30 other children were divided into two groups of 15: implicit learning intervention and implicit learning control. The inclusion criteria were as follows: having an age range of 9-12 years, diagnosis of learning disorder (based on psychiatric records available in children's counseling and rehabilitation centers), no disorder associated with learning disorder, right-handedness (based on the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory), having normal intelligence (according to the Wechsler Intelligence Scale), not taking psychiatric medication, lacking vision and hearing defects and history of seizures, and consent of their parents to participate in this study. The exclusion criteria were as follows: observation of seizures during stimulation sessions and regular non-attendance in tDCS sessions. Before the intervention, the subjects were administered the Serial Reaction Time Task software (Nissen & Bullemer, 1987) and the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield, 1971). The children in the intervention group received 1.5 mA transcranial electrical brain stimulation treatment for 20 minutes in 10 continuous daily sessions. After the intervention, the children were asked to perform the Serial Reaction Time Task. To analyze the obtained data, descriptive statistics indices, including mean and standard deviation, and inferential statistics, including mixed variance analysis, Bonferroni post hoc test, and correlated t test, were performed using SPSS version 18 software. The significance level for all tests was 0.05.
Results: The results for the speed of hand preference transfer of the left hand of children with learning disabilities showed that the main effect of block and learning type were significant (p<0.001). However, other effects were not significant (p>0.05). The results for the speed of hand preference transfer of the right hand of children with learning disabilities showed that the main effects of block and brain stimulation and the interactive effect of block and type of learning were significant (p<0.001). However, other effects were not significant (p>0.05).
Conclusion: According to the results, the effect of tDCS in the primary motor cortex on the speed of between-hand transfer in children with learning disabilities is effective in overt and covert learning conditions. Therefore, this treatment can be used along with other treatment methods in children with learning disabilities.

Keywords: Transcranial direct-current stimulation, Primary motor cortex, Hands preference transfer speed, Learning disability
Full-Text [PDF 734 kb]   (414 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research Article | Subject: Rehabilitation
References
1. Catts HW, Gillispie M, Leonard LB, Kail RV, Miller CA. The role of speed of processing, rapid naming, and phonological awareness in reading achievement. J Learn Disabil. 2002;35(6):509–24. [DOI]
2. American Psychiatric Publishing. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM–5TM. 5th ed. Arlington, VA, US: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.; 2013. [DOI]
3. Behrad B. Prevalence of learning disabilities in Iranian primary students: A meta– analysis. Journal of Exceptional Children. 2006;5(4):417–36. [Persian] [Article]
4. Kirk SA, Chalfant JC. Academic and developmental learning disabilities. Ronaghi S, Khanjani Z, Vosoughi Rahbari M. (Persian translator). Tehran: Publication of Exceptional Education Organization; 1998.
5. Heiman T, Berger O. Parents of children with Asperger syndrome or with learning disabilities: family environment and social support. Res Dev Disabil. 2008;29(4):289–300. [DOI]
6. Lerner JW. Learning disabilities: theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies. 7th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin; 1997.
7. Baranek GT. Efficacy of sensory and motor interventions for children with autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2002;32(5):397–422. [DOI]
8. Hasanati F, Khatounabadi SAR, Abd Alvahab M. A comparative study on motor skills in 5–year–old children with phonological and phonetic disorders. Auditory and Vestibular Research. 2010;19(1):71–7. [Persian]
9. Davari–Nia A, Yarmohammadian A, Ghamarani A. The comparative study of gross and fine motor skills and body balance in children with intellectual disability, autism and learning disorder with normal children. Archives of Rehabilitation. 2015;16(1):66–75. [Persian] [Article]
10. Grant JG, Siegel LS, D’Angiulli A. From schools to scans: a neuroeducational approach to comorbid math and reading disabilities. Front Public Health. 2020;8:469. [DOI]
11. Owens A. Supporting children's development: fine motor skills, extract from putting children first [Internet]. National Childcare Accreditation Council. 2008; 28(4): 3–5. Available from: [Article]
12. Pieters S, Desoete A, Roeyers H, Vanderswalmen R, Van Waelvelde H. Behind mathematical learning disabilities: what about visual perception and motor skills? Learning and Individual Differences. 2012;22(4):498–504. [DOI]
13. Woodward RJ, Surbrug PR. The performance of fundamental movement skills by elementary school children with learning disabilities. The Physical Educator. 2001;58(4):198.
14. Chaix Y, Albaret JM, Brassard C, Cheuret E, de Castelnau P, Benesteau J, et al. Motor impairment in dyslexia: the influence of attention disorders. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2007;11(6):368–74. [DOI]
15. Scott JL. The effect of a metronome–based coordination training programme on the fundamental gross motor skills of children with motor development delays [Thesis for Master degree in Exercise, Sport and Lifestyle Medicine]. [Stellenbosch, South Africa] : University of Stellenbosch; 2010.
16. Kirsch W, Hoffmann J. Asymmetrical intermanual transfer of learning in a sensorimotor task. Exp Brain Res. 2010;202(4):927–34. [DOI]
17. Anguera JA, Russell CA, Noll DC, Seidler RD. Neural correlates associated with intermanual transfer of sensorimotor adaptation. Brain Res. 2007;1185:136–51. [DOI]
18. Taylor HG, Heilman KM. Left–hemisphere motor dominance in righthanders. Cortex. 1980;16(4):587–603. [DOI]
19. Perez MA, Tanaka S, Wise SP, Sadato N, Tanabe HC, Willingham DT, et al. Neural substrates of intermanual transfer of a newly acquired motor skill. Curr Biol. 2007;17(21):1896–902. [DOI]
20. de Guise E, del Pesce M, Foschi N, Quattrini A, Papo I, Lassonde M. Callosal and cortical contribution to procedural learning. Brain. 1999;122 ( Pt 6):1049–62. [DOI]
21. Nejati V, Ashayeri H, Garousi Farshi MT, Aghdasi MT. The role of explicit knowledge of sequence in motor sequence learning. Research on Sport Science. 2007;5(15):161–71. [Persian]
22. Reber AS, Walkenfeld FF, Hernstadt R. Implicit and explicit learning: individual differences and IQ. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1991;17(5):888–96. [DOI]
23. Mirzakhany–Araghi N, Yasaei R, Khoshalipanah M, Nejati V, Pashazadeh–Azari Z, Tabatabaee SM. Motor learning in children with ADHD and normal children: comparison of implicit and explicit motor sequence. Journal of Clinical Physiotherapy Research. 2017;2(1):26–31. [DOI]
24. Izadi Najafabadi, Nejati V, Mirzakhany Araghi N, Pashazadeh Azari Z. Intermanual transfer of motor learning in children with autism spectrum disorder. Internal Medicine Today. 2013;19(2):97–103. [Persian] [Article]
25. Perez MA, Wise SP, Willingham DT, Cohen LG. Neurophysiological mechanisms involved in transfer of procedural knowledge. J Neurosci. 2007;27(5):1045–53. [DOI]
26. Curran T, Keele SW. Attentional and nonattentional forms of sequence learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 1993;19(1):189–202. [DOI]
27. Nissen MJ, Bullemer P. Attentional requirements of learning: evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology. 1987;19(1):1-32. [DOI]
28. Nicholson RI, Fawcett AJ. Dyslexia, learning, and the brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2008.
29. Kessler SK, Minhas P, Woods AJ, Rosen A, Gorman C, Bikson M. Dosage considerations for transcranial direct current stimulation in children: a computational modeling study. PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e76112. [DOI]
30. Fregni F, Marcondes R, Boggio PS, Marcolin MA, Rigonatti SP, Sanchez TG, et al. Transient tinnitus suppression induced by repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation. Eur J Neurol. 2006;13(9):996–1001. [DOI]
31. Fregni F, Boggio PS, Santos MC, Lima M, Vieira AL, Rigonatti SP, et al. Noninvasive cortical stimulation with transcranial direct current stimulation in Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord. 2006;21(10):1693–702. [DOI]
32. Fregni F, Potvin K, Dasilva D, Wang X, Lenkinski RE, Freedman SD, et al. Clinical effects and brain metabolic correlates in noninvasive cortical neuromodulation for visceral pain. Eur J Pain. 2011;15(1):53–60. [DOI]
33. Li S, Stampas A, Frontera J, Davis M, Li S. Combined transcranial direct current stimulation and breathing-controlled electrical stimulation for management of neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Med. 2018;50(9):814-20. [DOI]
34. Quartarone A, Morgante F, Bagnato S, Rizzo V, Sant'Angelo A, Aiello E, et al. Long lasting effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor imagery. Neuroreport. 2004;15(8):1287-91. [DOI]
35. Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971;9:97–113. [DOI]
36. Brito GN, Brito LS, Paumgartten FJ, Lins MF. Lateral preferences in Brazilian adults: an analysis with the Edinburgh Inventory. Cortex. 1989;25(3):403–15. [DOI]
37. Alipour A, Agah Harris M. Investigating the reliability and validity of the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory in Iran. Journal of Psychological Sciences. 2007;22:117-33. [Persian] [Article]
38. Mahmoodifar E, Movahedi A, Arab–Ameri E, Faramarzi S. The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation and selective motor training on fine motor skills in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences. 2017;13(1):44–50. [Persian] [Article]
39. Barnes KA, Howard JH, Howard DV, Gilotty L, Kenworthy L, Gaillard WD, et al. Intact implicit learning of spatial context and temporal sequences in childhood autism spectrum disorder. Neuropsychology. 2008;22(5):563–70. [DOI]
40. D'Cruz AM, Mosconi MW, Steele S, Rubin LH, Luna B, Minshew N, et al. Lateralized response timing deficits in autism. Biol Psychiatry. 2009;66(4):393–7. [DOI]
41. Travers BG, Klinger MR, Mussey JL, Klinger LG. Motor–linked implicit learning in persons with autism spectrum disorders. Autism Res. 2010;3(2):68–77. [DOI]
42. Camus M, Ragert P, Vandermeeren Y, Cohen LG. Mechanisms controlling motor output to a transfer hand after learning a sequential pinch force skill with the opposite hand. Clin Neurophysiol. 2009;120(10):1859–65. [DOI]
43. Dai TH, Liu JZ, Sahgal V, Brown RW, Yue GH. Relationship between muscle output and functional MRI–measured brain activation. Exp Brain Res. 2001;140(3):290–300. [DOI]
44. van Duinen H, Renken R, Maurits NM, Zijdewind I. Relation between muscle and brain activity during isometric contractions of the first dorsal interosseus muscle. Hum Brain Mapp. 2008;29(3):281–99. [DOI]
45. Dickins DSE, Sale MV, Kamke MR. Intermanual transfer and bilateral cortical plasticity is maintained in older adults after skilled motor training with simple and complex tasks. Front Aging Neurosci. 2015;7:73. [DOI]
46. Carroll TJ, Herbert RD, Munn J, Lee M, Gandevia SC. Contralateral effects of unilateral strength training: evidence and possible mechanisms. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2006;101(5):1514–22. [DOI]
47. Buch ER, Santarnecchi E, Antal A, Born J, Celnik PA, Classen J, et al. Effects of tDCS on motor learning and memory formation: A consensus and critical position paper. Clin Neurophysiol. 2017;128(4):589–603. [DOI]
48. Perez MA, Lungholt BKS, Nyborg K, Nielsen JB. Motor skill training induces changes in the excitability of the leg cortical area in healthy humans. Exp Brain Res. 2004;159(2):197–205. [DOI]
49. Clarke PJF, Sprlyan BF, Hirsch CR, Meeten F, Notebaert L. tDCS increases anxiety reactivity to intentional worry. J Psychiatr Res. 2020;120:34–9. [DOI]
Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2025 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb