Presentation
Search Abstracts | Symposia | Slide Sessions | Poster Sessions | Lightning Talks
Thetaburst Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Speech Motor Adaptation
There is a Poster PDF for this presentation, but you must be a current member or registered to attend SNL 2023 to view it. Please go to your Account Home page to register.
Poster A66 in Poster Session A, Tuesday, October 24, 10:15 am - 12:00 pm CEST, Espace Vieux-Port
Deryk S. Beal1,2,3, Kieran Wheatley2,3, Trina Mitchell2, Mohammad Naderi2; 1Department of Speech-Language Pathology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 2Bloorview Research Institute, Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, 3Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto
The application of neuromodulation methods have furthered our understanding of speech-related brain networks. The goal of this study was to investigate the role of left ventral motor cortex (LvMC) in performance on a speech adaptation task using thetaburst repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS). A priori power calculations determined that 75 participants were required to detect across group differences (Tang et al., 2021). We have screened 33 participants (age 18-36) that we identified as responders to the speech adaptation task and then randomized to receive excitatory (intermittent thetaburst stimulation at 90% Resting Motor Threshold), inhibitory (continuous thetaburst stimulation at 90% RMT), or sham rTMS to LvMC. Immediately following rTMS, participants completed an auditory perturbation task administered by Audapter and MATLAB. The auditory perturbation paradigm required participants to perform the task while listening to unaltered auditory feedback of their own voices for 60 trials (start phase), then perturbation of the auditory feedback was gradually shifted until it reached a maximum of a 25% increase in the F1 formant and 12.5% decrease in the F2 formant for 30 trials (ramp). The maximum perturbation was maintained for 30 trials (stay), and then removed again for 30 trials (end). The stay phase responses illustrate the participants’ online compensation for the perturbation, whereas the end phase responses represent lingering adaptive effects of motor learning from the previous perturbed state. To extract steady-state portions of the vowel, F1 and F2 for each trial were determined from a segment of the formant trace spanning 40% to 60%. Mixed ANOVAs were conducted separately for the F1 and F2 formants, with phase (start, stay) as a within-subject factor, and group (facilitatory, inhibitory, sham) as a between-subject factor. Significant effects of phase or group or their interaction, were followed by post-hoc t-tests. Preliminary results show that the excitatory rTMS group had a F1 MFR= -7.08 and a F2 MFR= 1.26, The inhibitory excitatory rTMS group had a F1 MFR= -6.37 and a F2 MFR= 1.89, and the Sham rTMS group had a F1 Mean Formant Ratio= -8.10 and F2 MFR= 3.20. There is a significant phase effect in F1 (F2,30=39.81 P<0.001) and F2 (F2,30=15.04 P<0.001), but there was no interaction between group and phase in F1 (P=0.85) or F2 (P=0.38). As per our a priori power calculation, we required 75 participants to detect a statistically significant difference across groups, data collection and advanced analyses are ongoing and updated results will be presented at the conference in November. Our results clearly replicate the speech adaptation response that is well documented in the literature. Our preliminary findings show, that an interaction across rTMS group and phase of APE is statistically unclear but that should be resolved as we approach our target sample size. Neuromodulation paired with APE has the potential to delineate the role of LvMC in speech adaptation and advance our understanding of the neural processes underlying speech motor adaptation, as well as inform potential neuromodulation therapeutic options.
Topic Areas: Speech Motor Control, Control, Selection, and Executive Processes