Neurophysiological Study of Movement Representation Techniques

A special issue of Brain Sciences (ISSN 2076-3425). This special issue belongs to the section "Neurotechnology and Neuroimaging".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (1 January 2024) | Viewed by 1709

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Exercise Intervention for Health Research Group (EXINH-RG), Department of Physiotherapy, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain
Interests: motor imagery; action observation; motor learning
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Departamento de Fisioterapia, Centro Superior de Estudios Universitarios La Salle, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Interests: dry needling; neurophysiology; biochemistry

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The study of movement representation techniques has increased in recent years. Some of the most studied sensorimotor training techniques are motor imagery, action observation training, mirror therapy or virtual reality. All these tools are based on the mirror neuron system. At the clinical level, all these tools have been shown to have an impact both in isolation and in combination with real movement (increased strength, improved motor control, hypoalgesia effects, etc.).

In this Special Issue, we aim to delve deeper into the neurophysiological study of these tools. We want to study the brain activity underlying the application of motion representation techniques within a clinical context. For this, we accept research designs of a clinical case or case series, but also observational studies, clinical trials using neuroimaging as the main outcome measure and systematic reviews with or without the meta-analysis of brain activity studies with respect to movement representation techniques.

Dr. Ferran Cuenca-Martínez
Prof. Dr. José Vicente León-Hernández
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Brain Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • motor imagery
  • action observation
  • EEG
  • fMRI
  • brain activity
  • neurophysiology

Published Papers (1 paper)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Other

22 pages, 5045 KiB  
Systematic Review
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) Effects on Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) and Nociceptive Processing in Healthy Subjects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
by Francisco Gurdiel-Álvarez, Yeray González-Zamorano, Sergio Lerma-Lara, Julio Gómez-Soriano, Juan Luis Sánchez-González, Josué Fernández-Carnero and Víctor Navarro-López
Brain Sci. 2024, 14(1), 9; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci14010009 - 21 Dec 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1366
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study is to determine the effect that different tDCS protocols have on pain processing in healthy people, assessed using quantitative sensory tests (QST) and evoked pain intensity. Methods: We systematically searched in EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, PEDro, PsycInfo, and [...] Read more.
Background: The aim of this study is to determine the effect that different tDCS protocols have on pain processing in healthy people, assessed using quantitative sensory tests (QST) and evoked pain intensity. Methods: We systematically searched in EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, PEDro, PsycInfo, and Web of Science. Articles on tDCS on a healthy population and regarding QST, such as pressure pain thresholds (PPT), heat pain thresholds (HPT), cold pain threshold (CPT), or evoked pain intensity were selected. Quality was analyzed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and PEDro scale. Results: Twenty-six RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis and sixteen in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in PPTs between tDCS and sham, but differences were observed when applying tDCS over S1 in PPTs compared to sham. Significant differences in CPTs were observed between tDCS and sham over DLPFC and differences in pain intensity were observed between tDCS and sham over M1. Non-significant effects were found for the effects of tDCS on HPTs. Conclusion: tDCS anodic over S1 stimulation increases PPTs, while a-tDCS over DLPFC affects CPTs. The HPTs with tDCS are worse. Finally, M1 a-tDCS seems to reduce evoked pain intensity in healthy subjects. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurophysiological Study of Movement Representation Techniques)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop