The Effects of Immobilisation and Exercise on Homeostatic Plasticity Mechanisms in Healthy Participants

February 3, 2023 updated by: Dennis Boye Larsen, Aalborg University
Homeostasis is important for maintaining a stable equilibrium of e.g., blood pressure, hormonal release, and release of neurotransmitters. Within the healthy brain, homeostatic plasticity mechanisms ensure stability in synaptic plasticity that maintains cortical excitability within a normal physiological range, while this regulation has been shown to be impaired in chronic pain conditions such as low back pain. Cortical excitability can also be decreased and increased experimentally, using immobilisation and exercise paradigms, respectively, yet it is unknown if this overall change in excitability is caused by a shift in homeostatic plasticity regulation. Investigating if immobilisation and exercise influences homeostatic plasticity responses, may therefore reveal important information on the malleability of homeostatic plasticity mechanisms and ways to modulate them.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of upper limb immobilisation and physical exercise of the hand on homeostatic plasticity in healthy individuals.

The study will be performed as a randomised cross-over study where each participant take part in three sessions, separated by approximately 24 hours. During each session, the participant will answer questionnaires and undergo quantitative sensory testing (QST). Baseline measures is obtained using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-induced motor evoked potentials (MEPs), which is done before the induction of homeostatic plasticity using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). MEPs are then obtained every 10 minutes for 30 minutes. Lastly, QST measures are obtained again.

As no previous studies have investigated the effect of immobilisation and exercise on homeostatic plasticity response, a sample size calculation was estimated based on MEP analysis from a previous study using α of 0.05, β of 0.80, and effect size of 0.29, yielding 22 participants. This is consistent with recent exploratory research that suggested that up to 28 participants would be needed. Therefore, the current study aimed at including 28 participants with an interim analysis performed after 10-15 inclusions.

Each participant will attend three identical experimental sessions on the same time on three consecutive days. Eight hours before attending the experimental sessions with immobilisation the participant will be fitted a splint (MANU-Hit DIGITUS POLLEX, Clinical Innovations, DK) to immobilise the right hand. Similarly, eight hours before attending the exercise session, the participant will be instructed to perform 150 ballistic finger movements with a pace of 0.5 Hz. During the experiment, the participant will be seated comfortably with arms and hands at rest. Electromyography electrodes will be placed on the right first interosseous muscle to assess the corticomotor excitability by recording of TMS induced MEPs on the left primary motor cortex. A neoprene cap will then be mounted to the head, and the optimal site for TMS (hotspot) will be identified and marked on the cap for standardisation. The cortical excitability will be measured before and immediately after homeostatic plasticity induction (time point 0-min), and then every 10 minutes for 30 minutes.

Homeostatic plasticity will be induced using tDCS applied to the left primary motor cortex for 7 minutes, followed by a break of 3 minutes and another 5 minutes of tDCS. A constant current of 1mA will be transmitted through the tDCS system (Starstim 32, Neuroelectrics, Barcelona, Spain) using two gelled electrodes placed into holes of a neoprene cap at the position of C3 and Fp2.

The distribution of the data will be tested using a Shapiro-Wilk's test of normality. To investigate the effect of immobilisation and exercise on homeostatic plasticity, a two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) will be conducted with factors Session (Session 1, session 2, and session 3) and Time (baseline, 0 min, 10 min, 20min, and 30 min) and a P value of <0.05 will be considered statistically significant. Adjustments will be made for multiple post-hoc comparisons using appropriate corrections.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

11

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Nordjylland
      • Aalborg, Nordjylland, Denmark, 9220
        • Aalborg University

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 60 years (ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

o Healthy, aged between 18-60 years, right-handed, and can speak, read, and understand Danish or English

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnant or breastfeeding
  • Regular use of cannabis, opioids or other drugs (except contraceptives)
  • Current or previous neurologic, musculoskeletal, mental, or other illnesses (e.g. brain or spinal cord injuries, degenerative neurological disorders, epilepsy, major depression, cardiovascular disease, chronic lung disease, etc.)
  • Current or previous chronic or recurrent pain condition
  • Current regular use of analgesic medication or other medication which may affect the trial (including paracetamol and NSAIDs)
  • Lack of ability to cooperate
  • Recent history of acute pain particularly in the lower limbs (unless related to low back pain in patients included in sub-project 6)
  • Abnormally disrupted sleep in 24 hours preceding experiment
  • Any medical or other condition (i.e. musculoskeletal, cardiorespiratory, neurological, etc.)
  • Contraindications to TMS application (history of epilepsy, metal implants in head or jaw, etc.)
  • Unable to pass the "Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Adult Safety Screen" or tDCS screening questionnaire

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: BASIC_SCIENCE
  • Allocation: NA
  • Interventional Model: SINGLE_GROUP
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
EXPERIMENTAL: Conditions
Participants will attend three sessions where two consist of immobilisation or exercise interventions.
Eight hours prior to attending the immobilisation session, a splint will be fitted to the hand of the participant and remain until the session start.
Eight hours prior to attending the exercise session, the participant will be instructed to perform 150 ballistic finger movements every hour until the session start.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Corticospinal excitability
Time Frame: Immediately after [0 minutes after homeostatic plasticity induction] and every 10 minutes up until 30 minutes after [10-30 minutes after homeostatic plasticity induction]
Change in corticospinal excitability (compared to baseline), as reflected by motor-evoked potential amplitudes induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation, after homeostatic plasticity induction
Immediately after [0 minutes after homeostatic plasticity induction] and every 10 minutes up until 30 minutes after [10-30 minutes after homeostatic plasticity induction]

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Quantitative Sensory Testing: Cuff detection threshold
Time Frame: Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Cuff detection threshold [kPa]
Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Quantitative Sensory Testing: Cuff pain tolerance threshold
Time Frame: Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Cuff pain tolerance threshold [kPa]
Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Quantitative Sensory Testing: Conditioned pain modulation
Time Frame: Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Conditioned pain modulation [kPa change]
Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Quantitative Sensory Testing: Temporal summation of pain
Time Frame: Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Temporal summation of pain [pain rating; Visual analogue scale; 0-10 cm; higher scores means more pain]
Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Quantitative Sensory Testing: Mechanical pain threshold
Time Frame: Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Mechanical pain threshold (pin prick) [force required for inducing pricking pain; nM]
Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Quantitative Sensory Testing: Handheld algometry at right dorsal interosseous muscle
Time Frame: Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Handheld algometry at right dorsal interosseous muscle [kPa]
Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Quantitative Sensory Testing: Handheld algometry at left dorsal interosseous muscle
Time Frame: Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Handheld algometry at left dorsal interosseous muscle [kPa]
Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Quantitative Sensory Testing: Handheld algometry at right tibialis anterior muscle
Time Frame: Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Handheld algometry at right tibialis anterior muscle [kPa]
Before and 30 minutes post homeostatic plasticity induction
Questionnaires: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
Time Frame: Before baseline corticospinal excitability measurements
Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI; 0-21; PSQI > 5 means poor sleep quality)
Before baseline corticospinal excitability measurements
Questionnaires: Pain Catastrophizing Scale
Time Frame: Before baseline corticospinal excitability measurements
Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS; 0-52; higher score means more pain catastrophizing)
Before baseline corticospinal excitability measurements
Questionnaires: International Physical Activity Questionnaire
Time Frame: Before baseline corticospinal excitability measurements
International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ; resting metabolic rate multiplied by activity per minutes performed > higher means better physical activity)
Before baseline corticospinal excitability measurements
Questionnaires: Positive and Negative Affective Schedule
Time Frame: Before baseline corticospinal excitability measurements
Positive and Negative Affective Schedule - Short Form (PANAS; 10-50; higher scores = higher levels of negative or positive affect)
Before baseline corticospinal excitability measurements

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (ACTUAL)

February 15, 2022

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

December 31, 2022

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

December 31, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 19, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 11, 2022

First Posted (ACTUAL)

February 23, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

February 6, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 3, 2023

Last Verified

February 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • N-20210047

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Healthy

Clinical Trials on Immobilisation

3
Subscribe