Randomized trial examines how EMG-triggered NMES and a-tDCS affect motor function and cortical excitability in healthy adults, suggesting distinct mechanisms.
Purpose Neuromodulatory interventions are increasingly used to enhance neuroplasticity and motor performance. Electromyography-triggered neuromuscular electrical stimulation (EMG-triggered NMES) and anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) target peripheral and cortical components of the motor system; however, the effects of their concurrent application remain unclear. This study examined whether concurrent EMG-triggered NMES and a-tDCS applied over the ipsilateral or contralateral primary motor cortex differentially modulate corticospinal excitability (CSE) and motor performance. Methods Twenty healthy adults participated in a randomized, counterbalanced, crossover study with three sessions: (1) EMG-triggered NMES + contralateral a-tDCS, (2) EMG-triggered NMES + ipsilateral a-tDCS, and (3) EMG-triggered NMES + sham a-tDCS. Primary outcomes were CSE, and secondary outcomes included short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), long-interval intracortical inhibition (LICI), intracortical facilitation (ICF), maximal voluntary contraction (MVC EMG ), and performance on a choice reaction time task (CRTT). Results CSE increased significantly following EMG-triggered NMES + contralateral a-tDCS ( p < 0.001and sham a-tDCS ( p < 0.001), but not after ipsilateral a-tDCS (P = 0.806). EMG-triggered NMES + contralateral a-tDCS increased ICF (P = 0.038) and reduced SICI (P = 0.029) and LICI (P = 0.05). Conversely, MVC (P = 0.021) and CRTT (P = 0.035) increased following EMG-triggered NMES + ipsilateral a-tDCS, with MVC differing significantly from the other conditions (P = 0.001). Conclusion EMG-triggered NMES combined with contralateral stimulation enhances CSE, whereas ipsilateral stimulation improves behavioural outcomes without altering contralateral CSE. These findings indicate a dissociation between changes in CSE and behavioural performance, suggesting that behavioural improvements may reflect neural processes not captured by the measures used in this study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alanazi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: