Posts Tagged Neuroplasticity

[EDITOR’S NOTE] Harnessing Neuroplasticity for Functional Recovery – Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy

Neuroplasticity is the capacity of the nervous system to change its chemistry, structure, and function in response to intrinsic or extrinsic stimuli.1 Neuroplastic mechanisms are activated by environmental, behavioral, or neural processes, and by disease; they underpin the motor and cognitive learning associated with physical therapy or exercise. Neuroplasticity can lead to positive or negative changes in function, which are referred to as adaptive and maladaptive neuroplasticity, respectively. In their roles as clinicians and as scientists, physical therapists and other rehabilitation professionals harness neuroplasticity using evidence-based interventions to maintain or enhance functional performance in individuals with neurological disorders. There is still much to learn about the optimal interventions and parameters of dose and intensity necessary to achieve adaptive neuroplastic changes.

Beyond questions related to dose and intensity, more information is needed regarding the degree to which factors such as past experiences, age, sex, genetics, and the presence of a neurological disorder affects capacity for neuroplastic change. In addition, it is likely that these factors interact with each other, making it even harder to understand their influence on neuroplastic change. Improved measures for assessment of neuroplasticity in humans are needed, such as biomarkers (including movement-related biomarkers) for diagnosing disorders, and predicting and monitoring treatment effectiveness. Greater knowledge of effective rehabilitation and exercise interventions that drive adaptive neuroplasticity, and are tailored to each person’s unique characteristics, will improve patient outcomes. The idea for this special issue was born out of a desire to advance understanding of the mechanisms driving functional change.

Two studies in this special issue use a newer neuroimaging method called functional near-infrared spectroscopy to measure cortical activity during dual-task walking.2,3 Impaired dual-task walking is common in neurological populations and can interfere with the ability to perform daily life activities. Hoppes et al2 examine frontal lobe activation patterns in individuals with and without visual vertigo during dual-task walking. The differences in cortical activation patterns identified increase our understanding of possible mechanisms underlying decrements in dual-task performance in individuals with vestibular disorders, and may be useful for diagnosis, and for predicting or determining functional recovery in this population. Stuart and Mancini3 investigate how open and closed-loop tactile cueing influences prefrontal cortex activity during single- and dual-task walking and turning in individuals with Parkinson disease. Tactile cues delivered to the feet in an open-loop (continuous rhythmic stimuli) or closed-loop (intermittent stimuli based on an individual’s movement) mode are associated with improved gait and turning performance, and it is hypothesized that attention arising from the prefrontal cortex may underlie these cueing effects.4 Their findings of unchanged prefrontal cortex activity are unexpected, and raise additional questions regarding the role of the prefrontal cortex during gait.

Rehabilitation approaches such as task-oriented training that emphasize high repetition and challenge have been shown to facilitate recovery of mobility and function in neurological populations, but responses are varied and residual deficits often remain.5,6 There is still much to be learned about how to deliver the best interventions to optimize nervous system adaptive neuroplasticity and learning that ultimately lead to optimal functional recovery. In a proof-of-principle case series article in this special issue, Peters et al7 explore whether deficits in motor planning of stepping can be reduced by physical therapy focused on fast stepping retraining, or by conventional therapy focused on balance and mobility training, in individuals with subacute stroke. Both interventions altered electroencephalogic measures indicative of motor planning duration and amplitude of stepping; furthermore, duration changes for all participants were in the direction of those acquired from healthy adult values. These findings suggest that physical therapy may be able to drive neuroplasticity to improve initiation of stepping in individuals after stroke.

A growing body of human and animal evidence supports thataerobic exercise  promotes neuroplasticity and functional recovery in many neurological disorders.1 Chaves et al8 utilized transcranial magnetic stimulation to examine changes in brain excitability measured in the upper extremity following a 40-minute bout of aerobic exercise (ie, body weight-supported treadmill walking) in individuals with progressive multiple sclerosis requiring devices for walking. Improvements in brain excitability were found following the aerobic exercise, which suggest that the capacity for neuroplasticity exists in this population. Participants’ responses to the exercise were greater in those with higher cardiorespiratory fitness and less body fat. The authors discuss that maintaining an active lifestyle and participating in aerobic exercise may be beneficial for improving brain health and neuroplasticity in people with progressive multiple sclerosis.

Finally, for the first time Vive et al9 translate to the clinical setting the enriched environment model used in laboratory-based animal studies. Evidence from preclinical studies suggests that combinational therapies such as enriched environments, which take advantage of multiple mechanisms underlying neuroplasticity, may promote greater functional recovery than a single therapy.10 The researchers examine the effects of a high-dose enriched task-specific therapy, which combines physical therapy with social and cognitive stimulation on motor recovery in individuals with chronic stroke. Their findings demonstrate that the enriched task-specific therapy intervention is feasible, and suggest that it may be beneficial for repair and recovery long after a stroke.

The articles in this issue provide new insights to improve our understanding of adaptive neuroplastic changes in nervous system activity resulting from neurological disorders or following exercise interventions. Evidence regarding benefits of physical therapy and exercise interventions to promote motor and cognitive function across the lifespan and in the presence of neurological pathology may motivate individuals to adapt and adhere to healthier lifestyles.1 Physical therapists and rehabilitation professionals can use the evolving neuroplasticity research to assist with decision-making regarding individualized therapy goals, and the selection and monitoring of therapeutic interventions to best achieve compliance and goal attainment. Collaborations between rehabilitation clinicians and researchers will enhance and hasten the translation of neuroplasticity research into effective clinical therapies. In the end, these efforts will certainly lead us to improved interventions that help to restore function and health to our patients.

REFERENCES

1. Cramer SC, Sur M, Dobkin BH, et al Harnessing neuroplasticity for clinical applications. Brain. 2011;134(pt 6):1591–1609. doi:10.1093/brain/awr039.

2. Hoppes C, Huppert T, Whitney S, et al Changes in cortical activation during dual-task walking in individuals with and without visual vertigo. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2020;44(2):156–163.

3. Stuart S, Mancini M. Pre-frontal cortical activation with open and closed-loop tactile cueing when walking and turning in Parkinson disease: a pilot study. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2020;44(2):121–131.

4. Maidan I, Bernad-Elazari H, Giladi N, Hausdorff JM, Mirelman A. When is higher level cognitive control needed for locomotor tasks among patients with Parkinson’s disease? Brain Topogr. 2017;30(4):531–538. doi:10.1007/s10548-017-0564-0.

5. Dobkin BH. Motor rehabilitation after stroke, traumatic brain, and spinal cord injury: common denominators within recent clinical trials. Curr Opin Neurol. 2009;22(6):563–569. doi:10.1097/WCO.0b013e3283314b11.

6. Hornby T, Reisman D, Ward I, et al Clinical practice guideline to improve locomotor functional following chronic stroke, incomplete spinal cord injury, and brain injury. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2020;40(1):49–100.

7. Peters S, Ivanova T, Lakhani B, Boyd L, Garland SJ. Neuroplasticity of cortical planning for initiating stepping post-stroke: a case series. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2020;44(2):164–172.

8. Chaves A, Devsahayam A, Kelly L, Pretty R, Ploughman M. Exercise-induced brain excitability changes in progressive multiple sclerosis: a pilot study. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2020;44(2):132–144.

9. Vive S, Geijerstam JL, Kuhn HG, Kall LB. Enriched, task-specific therapy in the chronic phase after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2020;44(2):145–155.

10. Malá H, Rasmussen CP. The effect of combined therapies on recovery after acquired brain injury: systematic review of preclinical studies combining enriched environment, exercise, or task-specific training with other therapies. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2017;35(1):25–64. doi:10.3233/RNN-160682.

via Harnessing Neuroplasticity for Functional Recovery : Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy

, ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] What is the potential of virtual reality for post-stroke sensorimotor rehabilitation?

Free first page

via What is the potential of virtual reality for post-stroke sensorimotor rehabilitation?: Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics: Vol 0, No 0

, , , ,

Leave a comment

[VIDEO] Recovery from Brain Injury Occurs for the Rest of a Person’s Life – YouTube

The human brain is a wonderful organ with amazing flexibility. Learn more about recovery.

via Recovery from Brain Injury Occurs for the Rest of a Person’s Life – YouTube

, , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Music Therapy Enhances Executive Functions and Prefrontal Structural Neuroplasticity after Traumatic Brain Injury: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes lifelong cognitive deficits, particularly impairments of executive functioning (EF). Musical training and music-based rehabilitation have been shown to enhance cognitive functioning and neuroplasticity, but the potential rehabilitative effects of music in TBI are still largely unknown. The aim of the present crossover randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to determine the clinical efficacy of music therapy on cognitive functioning in TBI and to explore its neural basis.

Using an AB/BA design, 40 patients with moderate or severe TBI were randomized to receive a 3-month neurological music therapy intervention either during the first (AB, n = 20) or second (BA, n = 20) half of a 6-month follow-up period. Neuropsychological and motor testing and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were performed at baseline and at the 3-month and 6-month stage. Thirty-nine subjects who participated in baseline measurement were included in an intention-to-treat analysis using multiple imputation. Results showed that general EF (as indicated by the Frontal Assessment Battery [FAB]) and set shifting improved more in the AB group than in the BA group over the first 3-month period and the effect on general EF was maintained in the 6-month follow-up. Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analysis of the structural MRI data indicated that gray matter volume (GMV) in the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) increased significantly in both groups during the intervention versus control period, which also correlated with cognitive improvement in set shifting. These findings suggest that neurological music therapy enhances EF and induces fine-grained neuroanatomical changes in prefrontal areas.

 

via Music Therapy Enhances Executive Functions and Prefrontal Structural Neuroplasticity after Traumatic Brain Injury: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial | Journal of Neurotrauma

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Musical Sonification of Arm Movements in Stroke Rehabilitation Yields Limited Benefits – Full Text

Neurologic music therapy in rehabilitation of stroke patients has been shown to be a promising supplement to the often strenuous conventional rehabilitation strategies. The aim of this study was threefold: (i) replicate results from a previous study with a sample from one clinic (henceforth called Site 1; N = 12) using an already established recording system, and (ii) conceptually replicate previous findings with a less costly hand-tracking system in Site 2 (N = 30), and (iii) compare both sub-studies’ outcomes to estimate the efficiency of neurologic music therapy. Stroke patients in both sites were randomly assigned to treatment or control groups and received daily training of guided sequential upper limb movements additional to their standard stroke rehabilitation protocol. Treatment groups received sonification (i.e., changes in musical pitch) of their movements when they moved their affected hand up and down to reproduce a sequence of the first six notes of a C major scale. Controls received the same movement protocol, however, without auditory feedback. Sensors at the upper arm and the forearm (Xsens) or an optic sensor device (Leapmotion) allowed to measure kinematics of movements and movement smoothness. Behavioral measures pre and post intervention included the Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) and the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) and movement data. Bayesian regression did not show evidence supporting an additional effect of sonification on clinical mobility assessments. However, combined movement data from both sites showed slight improvements in movement smoothness for the treatment group, and an advantage for one of the two motion capturing systems. Exploratory analyses of EEG-EMG phase coherence during movement of the paretic arm in a subset of patients suggested increases in cortico-muscular phase coherence specifically in the ipsilesional hemisphere after sonification therapy, but not after standard rehabilitation therapy. Our findings show that musical sonification is a viable treatment supplement to current neurorehabilitation methods, with limited clinical benefits. However, given patients’ enthusiasm during training and the low hardware price of one of the systems it may be considered as an add-on home-based neurorehabilitation therapy.

Introduction

Stroke survivors frequently suffer from severe disabilities. Stroke may lead to impairments in motor and sensory systems, emotion regulation, language perception, and cognitive functions (Morris and Taub, 2008). Impaired arm function caused by gross-motor disability is also a common consequence of stroke immensely affecting quality of life in a considerable number of patients. In this case, regaining control over body movements is one of the crucial components in post-stroke recovery. There is an urgent need for effective motor rehabilitation approaches to improve quality of life in stroke survivors. Different therapeutic approaches such as Constraint Induced Movement Therapy (CIMT), mental practice, robot-aided therapy, electromyographic biofeedback, and repetitive task training have been applied to improve arm function after stroke (Langhorne et al., 2009). Of note, in a recent review it has been suggested that neurologic music therapy might be more effective than conventional physiotherapy (for a recent review see Sihvonen et al., 2017).

Motivational factors seem to play an important role for the beneficial effects of neurologic music therapy. From the patients’ informal descriptions of their experience with music-supported training, it appears that this is frequently highly enjoyable and a highlight of their rehabilitation process, regardless of the form of auditory stimulation, be it piano tones, or sonification of movement with other timbres [for a review see Altenmüller and Stewart (2018)]. However, effects of music supported therapy in stroke rehabilitation are not always consistent. In a recent review, seven controlled studies that evaluated the efficacy of music as an add-on therapy in stroke rehabilitation were identified (Sihvonen et al., 2017). In these studies, training of finger dexterity of the paretic hand was done using either a piano-keyboard, or, for wrist movements, drum-pads tuned to a C major scale. Superiority of the music group over fine motor training without music and over conventional physiotherapy was evident in one study after intervention comprising five 30-min sessions per week for 3 weeks (Schneider et al., 2010). The beneficial effect seen in the music group could be specifically attributed to the musical component of the training rather than the motor training per se, since patients practicing with mute instruments remained inferior to the music group. Here, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) was applied before and after 20 sessions of either music supported therapy on a keyboard or equivalent therapy without sound. FMA scores of the motor functions of the upper limb improved by 16 in the music group and by 5 in the control group, both improvements being statistically significant although to a lesser degree in the control group (p = 0.02 vs. p = 0.04; Tong et al. (2015)).

With regard to the neurophysiological mechanisms of neurological music therapy, it was demonstrated that patients undergoing music supported therapy not only regained their motor abilities at a faster rate but also improved in timing, precision and smoothness of fine motor skills as well as showing increases in neuronal connectivity between sensorimotor and auditory cortices as assessed by means of EEG-EEG-coherence (Altenmüller et al., 2009Schneider et al., 2010).

These findings are corroborated by a case study of a patient who underwent music supported training 20 months after suffering a stroke. Along with the clinical improvement, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) demonstrated activation of motor and premotor areas, when listening to simple piano tunes, thus providing additional evidence for the establishment of an auditory-sensorimotor co-representation due to the training procedure (Rojo et al., 2011). Likewise, in a larger group of 20 chronic stroke patients, increases in motor cortex excitability following 4 weeks of music-supported therapy were demonstrated using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), which were accompanied by marked improvements of fine motor skills (Amengual et al., 2013).

In addition to functional reorganization of the auditory-sensorimotor network, recent findings have reported changes in cognition and emotion after music-supported therapy in chronic stroke patients. Fujioka et al. (2018) demonstrated in a 10-week-long randomized controlled trial (RCT), including 14 patients with music supported therapy and 14 patients receiving conventional physiotherapy, that both groups only showed minor improvements. However, the music group performed significantly better in the trail making test, indicating an improvement in cognitive flexibility, and furthermore showed enhanced social and communal participation in the Stroke Impairment Scale and in PANAS (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, Watson et al., 1988), lending support to the prosocial and motivational effects of music. In another RCT with an intervention of only 4 weeks, Grau-Sánchez et al. (2018) demonstrated no superiority in fine motor skills in the music group as compared to a control group, but instead an increase in general quality of life as assessed by the Profile of Mood states and the stroke specific quality of live questionnaire. Despite growing evidence, the neurophysiological mechanisms of neurological music therapy remain poorly understood.

Most of the existing studies on music-supported therapy have focused on rehabilitation of fine motor functions of the hand. Much less evidence exists on post-stroke rehabilitation of gross motor functions of the upper limbs. In a previous study we thus developed a movement sonification therapy in order to train upper arm and shoulder functions (Scholz et al., 2015). Gross movements of the arm were transformed into discrete sounds, providing a continuous feedback in a melodic way, tuned to a major scale (i.e., patients could use movements of their paretic arms as a musical instrument). In this way, sound perception substituted for defective proprioception. In a first pilot study in subacute stroke patients we were able to demonstrate that musical sonification therapy reduced joint pain in the Fugl-Meyer pain subscale (difference between groups: −10; d = 1.96) and improved smoothness of movements (d = 1.16) in comparison to movement therapy without sound (Scholz et al., 2016). Here, we extend these findings by comparing the effects of the established musical sonification setup (Scholz et al., 2016) with a newly developed, less expensive sonification device in a group of subacute stroke patients with upper limb motor impairments. The only apparent differences between both data acquisition methods were the improved sound quality and the loss of need to strap sensors to patient limbs. In order to further elucidate the neurophysiological underpinnings of musical sonification therapy we simultaneously recorded EEG and EMG data from a subset of patients to analyze cortico-muscular phase coherence during upper limb movements (Chen et al., 2018Pan et al., 2018). According to previous studies (Pan et al., 2018) we hypothesized that cortico-muscular phase coherence increases in the ipsilesional hemisphere after musical sonification therapy. […]

 

Continue —->  Frontiers | Musical Sonification of Arm Movements in Stroke Rehabilitation Yields Limited Benefits | Neuroscience

Figure 2. Experimental setup. (A) three-dimensional space (the Leapmotion controller at Site 2 was placed on the board at the position marked in purple), with axis labels describing qualitative sound changes when the hand was moved relative to the frame (and hence, the body). (B) Xsens sensors as used at Site 1, attached to wrist and upper arm of patient. (C) Leapmotion controller as used at Site 2, with the space axes superimposed. Panel (A) taken from Scholz et al. (2016).

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[VIDEO] How to Increase Neuroplasticity (6 Neuroplasticity Exercises) – YouTube

Neuroplasticity is the brain’s ability to restructure its neural connections at any given moment. It allows nerve cells to adjust their formation in response to novelty and challenged.

This video talks about the key principles of neuroplasticity and the 6 simple ways to increase neuroplasticity.

Read the article for the studies: http://siimland.com/how-to-increase-n…

Brain Training Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0168…

Table of Contents What is Neuroplasticity: 00:14 Neuroplasticity Explained: 00:49 Benefits of Neuroplasticity: 01:54 The Key to Increase Neuroplasticity: 02:22 Strategies to Increase Neuroplasticity: 02:32 #1 Whole-Brain Holistic Thinking: 02:40 #2 Practice FLOW: 04:08 #3 Expose Yourself to Novelty: 05:25 #4 Meditation: 05:45 #5 Exercise: 06:20 #6 Intermittent Fasting: 06:43 Nutrients for Neuroplasticity: 07:04 Concluding Remarks: 08:12 Become Limitless: 08:52

via How to Increase Neuroplasticity (6 Neuroplasticity Exercises) – YouTube

, , , ,

Leave a comment

[VIDEO] Harnessing the Power of Neuroplasticity: The Nuts and Bolts of Better Brains – YouTube

What if your brain at 77 were as plastic as it was at 7? What if you could learn Mandarin with the ease of a toddler or play Rachmaninoff without breaking a sweat? A growing understanding of neuroplasticity suggests these fantasies could one day become reality. Neuroplasticity may also be the key to solving diseases like Alzheimer’s, depression, and autism. In this program, leading neuroscientists discuss their most recent findings and both the tantalizing possibilities and pitfalls for our future cognitive selves.

PARTICIPANTS: Alvaro Pascual-Leone, Nim Tottenham, Carla Shatz

MODERATOR: Guy McKhann

MORE INFO ABOUT THE PROGRAM AND PARTICIPANTS: https://www.worldsciencefestival.com/…

This program is part of the BIG IDEAS SERIES, made possible with support from the JOHN TEMPLETON FOUNDATION.

TOPICS: – Opening film 00:07 – What is neuroplasticity? 03:53 – Participant introductions 04:21 – Structure of the brain 05:21 – Is the brain fundamentally unwired at the start? 07:02 – Why does the process of human brain development seem inefficient? 08:30 – Balancing stability and plasticity 10:43 – Critical periods of brain development 13:01 – Extended human childhood development compared to other animals 14:54 – Stability and. plasticity in the visual system 17:37 – Reopening the visual system 25:13 – Pros and cons of brain plasticity vs. stability 27:28 – Plasticity in the autistic brain 29:55 – What is Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) 31:25 – Phases of emotional development 33:10 – Schizophrenia and plasticity 37:40 – Recovery from brain injury 40:24 – Modern rehabilitation techniques 47:21 – Holy grail of Neuroscience 50:12 – Enhancing memory performance as we age 53:37 – Regulating emotions 57:19

PROGRAM CREDITS: – Produced by Nils Kongshaug – Associate Produced by Christine Driscoll – Opening film written / produced by Vin Liota – Music provided by APM – Additional images and footage provided by: Getty Images, Shutterstock, Videoblocks

This program was recorded live at the 2018 World Science Festival and has been edited and condensed for YouTube.

via Harnessing the Power of Neuroplasticity: The Nuts and Bolts of Better Brains – YouTube

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[VIDEO] What is Neuroplasticity? – YouTube

What is Neuroplasticity? Dr. Matthew Antonucci from Plasticity Brain Centers of Orlando, Florida gives us a breakdown of what the term really means.

 

 

, , ,

Leave a comment

[VIDEO] Recovery from Brain Injury Occurs for the Rest of a Person’s Life – YouTube

The human brain is a wonderful organ with amazing flexibility. Learn more about recovery.

 

, , ,

3 Comments

[WEB SITE] Can a Bit of Electricity Improve Your Brain?

Neuromodulation expands beyond health care.

PublicDomainPictures/Pixabay

Source: PublicDomainPictures/Pixabay

Neuromodulation is the use of electrical, magnetic, or chemical stimulation to modulate nervous tissue function. Research studies with promising results from novel treatments using neuromodulations are emerging.

On October 4, 2019, a study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, led by Professor Helen S. Mayberg, M.D. at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Dr. Andrea Crowell at Emory University, showed that deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant depression for a majority of the participants had a “robust and sustained antidepressant response” in an over eight-year period, and there were not any suicides.

Earlier this year, in April, Boston University scientists Robert M. G. Reinhart and John A. Nguyen published in Nature Neuroscience a neuromodulation study that demonstrated noninvasive electrical brain stimulation temporarily improved the working memory accuracy in older adults. The study used 84 people—half between the ages of 20-29, and the other half between 60-76 years old.

The scientists hypothesize that their technique improved behavior due to neuroplastic changes in functional connectivity for up to 50 minutes afterward. Additional studies with more test subjects are needed to test the hypothesis and determine the full course potential of the effects.

These are just a few examples of the numerous research studies in neuromodulation. Neuromodulation methods include optogenetics, cochlear implants, retinal implants, deep brain and spinal cord stimulators, pharmacotherapy, and electroceuticals. Potential applications for neuromodulation may include chronic pain managementAlzheimer’s disease, depression, complications due to stroke, traumatic brain injuries, Parkinson’s disease, epilepsy, migraines, spinal cord injuries, and other conditions. Currently, there are over 590 neuromodulation clinical studies worldwide, according to the U.S. National Institute of Health’s Library of Medicine database of privately and publicly funded clinical studies conducted around the world.

Within the growing neuromodulation market, one segment, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), is moving beyond health care and is making inroads into the consumer segment. Transcranial direct current stimulation is a form of noninvasive brain stimulation using a constant weak electrical current. Typically the voltage is less than two milliamps.

One of the earliest records of transcranial direct current stimulation dates to the ancient Roman Empire. The physician to Roman Emperor Tiberius Claudius Nero Caesar, Scribonius Largus, put a live torpedo fish, an electric ray capable of delivering up to 220 volts, directly on a patient in an effort to use the animal’s electrical discharges for pain therapy.

Fast forward to present day, and transcranial direct current stimulation is being used for a variety of purposes as an emerging technology for neuroscientists, elite athletes, e-sports gamers, neurologists, musicians, and psychiatrists—sans the torpedo fish. Instead, electronic devices in various form-factors are used to deliver currents to the human brain noninvasively via the scalp. Consumer-based transcranial direct current stimulation devices operate on the principle of neuroplasticity—the brain’s ability to change neural connections and behavior.

“Neuroplasticity is the property of the brain that enables it to change its own structure and functioning in response to activity and mental experience,” wrote the New York Times bestselling author, psychiatrist, and psychoanalyst, Norman Doidge, FRCPC, in his 2015 book The Brain’s Way of Healing: Remarkable Discoveries and Recoveries from the Frontiers of Neuroplasticity.

An example of a consumer-based transcranial direct current stimulation device is the Halo Sport 2, a wireless headset introduced in January 2019 that stimulates the brain’s motor cortex through electrical currents to create a temporary state of neuroplasticity. Whether the activity is learning music, dance, or sports, the human brain learns movement via the motor cortex.

The device is made by venture-backed startup Halo Neuroscience, a company founded in 2013 by Daniel Chao, Brett Wingeier, Lee von Kraus, Ph.D., and Amol Sarva, with investments from Jazz Venture Partners, Lux Capital, TPG, Andreessen Horowitz, and others. To use the Halo Sport 2 is simple—neuroprime with the headset on for 20 minutes, then train for an hour afterward.

Halo Sport users include athletes, musicians, and the military—such as members of Major League Baseball’s San Francisco Giants, National Basketball Association’s Golden State Warriors, the U.S. Navy SEALs, USA Cycling, the United States Ski Team, Berklee College of Music, Invictus, as well as many others.

World champion triathlete Timothy O’Donnell is a Halo Sport user. O’Donnell has over 50 podium finishes, including 22 wins. He won two IRONMAN titles, six Armed Forces National Championships, nine Ironman 70.3 races, an ITU Long Distance World Champion race, and many other prestigious competitive triathlon medals. As a world-class elite athlete, O’Donnell is constantly seeking innovative ways to improve his performance. He reportedly reached out to Halo Neuroscience after reading about the technology and incorporates Halo Sport neuropriming in his training to give him an edge.

A number of investments in neuroscience companies have emerged in recent years, such as Bryan Johnson’s Kernel, Elon Musk’s Neuralink, and Tej Tadi’s MindMaze. Other neurotechnology startups include Synchron, founded by Nicholas Opie and Thomas Oxley, BIOS founded by Emil Hewage and Oliver Armitage, BrainCo founded by Bicheng Han, Nextmind founded by Gwendal Kerdavid and Sid Kouider, Thync founded by Isy Goldwasser and Jamie Tyler, EMOTIV founded by Tan Le and Dr. Geoff Mackellar, Paradromics founded by Matt Angle, Bitbrain founded by Javier Minguez Zafra and Maria Lopez Valdes, Flow Neuroscience founded by Daniel Månsson and Erik Rehn, Dreem founded by Hugo Mercier and Quentin Soulet de Brugière, Neuros Medical founded by Jon J. Snyder, Neurable founded by James Hamet, Michael Thompson and Ramses Alcaide, Cognixion founded by Andeas Forsland, Q30 Innovations founded by Bruce Angus and Thomas Hoey, Neuroscouting founded by Dr. Wesley Clapp and Dr. Brian Miller, and Meltin MMI founded by Masahiro Kasuya, and Neuropace founded by David R. Fischell.

The global neuromodulation device industry is expected to increase to 13.3 billion by 2022, according to Neurotech Reports figures published in September 2018. Within this growing space, consumer-based transcranial direct current stimulation is an emerging market to watch.

 

via Can a Bit of Electricity Improve Your Brain? | Psychology Today

, , , , ,

1 Comment

%d bloggers like this: