Impact of coil position and electrophysiological monitoring on determination of motor thresholds to transcranial magnetic stimulation

Objective: We compared motor and movement thresholds to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in healthy subjects and investigated the effect of different coil positions on thresholds and MEP (motor-evoked potential) amplitudes. Methods: The abductor pollicis brevis (APB) ‘hot spot’ and a standard scalp position were stimulated. APB resting motor threshold (APB MEP-MT) defined by the ‘5/10’ electrophysiological method was compared with movement threshold (MOV-MT), defined by visualization of movements. Additionally, APB MEP-MTs were evaluated with the ‘3/6 method,’ and MEPs were recorded at a stimulation intensity of 120% APB MEP-MT at each position. Results: APB MEP-MTs were significantly lower by stimulation of the ‘hot spot’ than of the standard position, and significantly lower than MOV-MTs (n=15). There were no significant differences between the ‘3/6’ and the ‘5/10’ methods, or between APB MEP amplitudes by stimulating each position at 120% APB MEP-MT. Conclusions: Coil position and electrophysiological monitoring influenced motor threshold determinations. Performing 6 instead of 10 trials did not produce different threshold measurements. Adjustment of intensity according to APB MEP-MT at the stimulated position did not influence APB MEP amplitudes. Significance: Standardization of stimulation positions, nomenclature and criteria for threshold measurements should be considered in design and comparison of TMS protocols.