Examining reliability of ipsilateral motor pathway measures in adults highlights their utility in assessing excitability.
Examining ipsilateral motor pathways, purportedly reflecting cortico-reticulospinal excitability, has received growing attention in rehabilitation and exercise science. However, the reliability of measures used to assess its excitability, such as ipsilateral motor-evoked potential (iMEP), remains largely unverified. Fifty-three participants (26 males, 27 females) completed two laboratory visits one week apart. Dominant arm contralateral MEP (cMEP) and non-dominant arm iMEP, along with maximal compound muscle action potential (M-max), from both m.biceps brachii were recorded. After determination of preacher curl one-repetition maximum (1-RM), participants performed four sets of five preacher curl repetitions at 30% of 1-RM, with 30 s rest between sets. Transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered at 100% of maximum stimulator output during the concentric phase of the contraction (110° of flexion). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for all variables indicated good-to-excellent intra-session (ICC ≥ 0.88) and inter-session reliability (ICC ≥ 0.80). Notably, the ICCs for iMEP and cMEP amplitudes demonstrated excellent reliability for both intra-session (ICC ≥ 0.98) and inter-session (ICC ≥ 0.91) measurements. iMEP presence was reliable (ICC = 0.87) and had similar variability as iMEP amplitude. However, ICC for iMEP/cMEP ratio (ICAR) was 0.83 and there was substantial inter-session variability (coefficient of variation = 56.8%; relative standard error of measurement = 31.7%). Sex did not influence the reliability of the measures. iMEP and cMEP measured during preacher curl exhibited excellent intra-session and good-to-excellent inter-session reliability in both sexes. Thus, this test is a useful tool to evaluate cortico-reticulospinal and corticospinal excitability in humans, although caution is advised if using ICAR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: