Inter-stimulus Interval Effect on Tactile Habituation: An Electrophysiological Approach

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 46 Sayı: 2, 327 - 333, 11.06.2019

Güliz Akın Çağdaş Güdücü

https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.574931

Öz

Objective: The current study aims to investigate different inter-stimulus interval effect on habituation process by using non-painful tactile stimuli. 

Methods: Twelve right-handed healthy volunteers (6 female; mean age: 22.9 ± 1.93 years) participated to the study. The electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded from 64 channels. Non-painful tactile stimuli (~140 kPa) were delivered to the right index finger via using a pneumatic stimulator. Somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) paradigm was used in all session. Inter-stimulus interval (ISI) was selected as 2s, 4s, and 8s and applied in separate sessions (as ISI2, ISI4 and ISI8). 

Results: Peak-to-peak maximum amplitudes of N2, P3 and N4 components were measured for three different ISI and for three different electrode sites (Fz, Cz, Pz). The 3x3 repeated measures ANOVA test was employed for statistical analysis. According to the analysis, a significant inter-stimulus interval (ISI) effect was found on both PPmaxN2P3 and PPmaxP3N4 (p=0.004 and p=0.001 respectively). The amplitudes of ISI8 session in all electrode sites higher than ISI2 session for both PPmaxN2P3 (p=0.024) and PPmaxP3N4 (p=0.012). Also, ISI4 session has higher amplitudes than ISI2 session (p=0.05) for the PPmaxP3N4.  

Conclusion: This study revealed that the late components of SEPs are affected by the ISI change. The amplitudes of SEP components are increased as ISI increased.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

Non-painful tactile stimuli, habituation, inter-stimulus interval

Kaynakça

• 1. Klingner CM, Hasler C, Brodoehl S, Witte OW. Excitatory and inhibitory mechanisms underlying somatosensory habituation: Somatosensory Habituation. Hum Brain Mapp. 2014; 35: 152-60.
• 2. Klingner CM, Nenadic I, Hasler C, Brodoehl S, Witte OW. Habituation within the somatosensory processing hierarchy. Behav Brain Res. 2011; 225: 432-6.
• 3. Gallace A, Spence C. The science of interpersonal touch: An overview. Neurosci Biobehav R. 2010; 34: 246- 59.
• 4. Angel RW, Quick WM, Curtis Boylls C, Weinrich M, Rodnitzky RL. Decrement of somatosensory evoked potentials during repetitive stimulation. Electroen Clin Neuro. 1985; 60: 335-42.
• 5. Bingel U, Schoell E, Herken W, Büchel C. A. Habituation to painful stimulation involves the antinociceptive system: Pain. 2007; 131: 21-30.
• 6. Nangini C, Ross B, Tam F, Graham SJ. Magnetoencephalographic study of vibrotactile evoked transient and steady-state responses in human somatosensory cortex. NeuroImage. 2006; 33: 252-62.
• 7. Robert Dowman. Interstimulus Interval Has No Effect on a Mid-Latency Scalp Potential Generated by Innocuous-Related Activity in the Primary Somatosensory Cortex. Brain Topogr. 1997; 10: 145-54.
• 8. Uglem M, Omland PM, Stjern M, Gravdahl GB, Sand T. Habituation of laser-evoked potentials by migraine phase: a blinded longitudinal study. J Headache Pain. 2017; 18: 100.
• 9. Lehser C, Wagner E, Strauss DJ. Somatosensory Evoked Responses Elicited by Haptic Sensations in Midair. IEEE T Neur Sys Reh. 2018; 26: 2070-7.
• 10. Forss N, Salmelin R, Hari R. Comparison of somatosensory evoked fields to airpuff and electric stimuli. Electroen Clin Neuro. 1994; 92: 510-7.
• 11. Ploner M, Pollok B, Schnitzler A. Pain Facilitates Tactile Processing in Human Somatosensory Cortices. J Neurophysiol. 2004; 92: 1825-9.
• 12. Price DD. Psychological and Neural Mechanisms of the Affective Dimension of Pain. Science. 2000; 288(5472): 1769-72.
• 13. McDiarmid TA, Bernardos AC, Rankin CH. Habituation is altered in neuropsychiatric disorders—A comprehensive review with recommendations for experimental design and analysis. Neurosci Biobehav R. 2017; 80: 286-305.
• 14. Ozgoren M, Erdogan U, Bayazit O, Taslica S, Oniz A. Brain asymmetry measurement using EMISU (embedded interactive stimulation unit) in applied brain biophysics. Comput Biol Med. 2009; 39: 879-88.
• 15. Jurcak V, Tsuzuki D, Dan I. 10/20, 10/10, and 10/5 systems revisited: Their validity as relative head-surface-based positioning systems. NeuroImage. 2007; 34: 1600-11.
• 16. Kalita J, Bhoi SK, Misra UK. Is Lack of Habituation of Evoked Potential a Biological Marker of Migraine? Clin J Pain. 2014; 30: 724-9.
• 17. Wikstrom H, Huttunen J, Korvenoja A. Effects of interstimulus interval on sensory evoked magnetic fields (SEFs) a hypothesis concerning SEF generation at the primary sensorimotor. Electroen Clin Neuro. 1996; 100: 479-87.
• 18. Benedetti F. Sensory and Motor Functions of the Hand. In: Watt WC, editor. Writing Systems and Cognition: Perspectives from Psychology, Physiology, Linguistics, and Semiotics. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 1994: 347–73.
• 19. Hayward V. A Brief Overview of the Human Somatosensory System. In: Papetti S, Saitis C, editors. Musical Haptics. Springer International Publishing; 2018: 29–48.
• 20. Raji TT, Vartiainen NV, Jousmäki V, Hari R. Effects of Interstimulus Interval on Cortical Responses to Painful Laser Stimulation. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2003; 1: 73-9.
• 21. Tomberg C, Desmedt JE, Ozaki I, Nguyen TH, Chalklin V. Mapping somatosensory evoked potentials to finger stimulation at intervals of 450 to 4000 msec and the issue of habituation when assessing early cognitive components. Electroen Clin Neuro. 1989; 74: 347-58.