Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia
Identifieur interne : 000920 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000919; suivant : 000921Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia
Auteurs : Cathy M. Stinear ; Winston D. ByblowSource :
- Movement Disorders [ 0885-3185 ] ; 2004-11.
English descriptors
Abstract
Differences between control and focal hand dystonia (FHD) subject groups in short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) as determined by paired transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be difficult to demonstrate, due to interindividual differences. The purpose of this study was to compare two TMS methods for assessing SICI in 8 control and 7 FHD subjects. Electromyographic (EMG) data were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of the dominant hands of the control subjects and affected hands of the FHD subjects. The first method used a conventional approach of setting conditioning stimulus intensity to 80% of rest threshold (RTh) and test stimulus intensity to 120% RTh. Three interstimulus intervals (ISIs) were used: 2 msec, 3 msec, and the ISI between 2 and 3 msec that produced optimal SICI. The second method was novel in that test stimulus intensity was set to 150% active threshold (ATh), and conditioning stimulus intensity was varied between 50% and 100% ATh. The latter was determined at the threshold for SICI and expressed as a ratio of ATh. There was no difference between the subject groups in the degree of SICI produced using the first method, at the three ISIs studied. However, using the second method, the SICI threshold:ATh ratio was found to be significantly higher for FHD subjects. This finding suggests that determining the SICI threshold:ATh ratio may be a more sensitive measure of intracortical inhibitory function than more conventional methods. © 2004 Movement Disorder Society
Url:
DOI: 10.1002/mds.20160
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5BLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia</title><author><name sortKey="Stinear, Cathy M" sort="Stinear, Cathy M" uniqKey="Stinear C" first="Cathy M." last="Stinear">Cathy M. Stinear</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Byblow, Winston D" sort="Byblow, Winston D" uniqKey="Byblow W" first="Winston D." last="Byblow">Winston D. Byblow</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B</idno><date when="2004" year="2004">2004</date><idno type="doi">10.1002/mds.20160</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000920</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia</title><author><name sortKey="Stinear, Cathy M" sort="Stinear, Cathy M" uniqKey="Stinear C" first="Cathy M." last="Stinear">Cathy M. Stinear</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Byblow, Winston D" sort="Byblow, Winston D" uniqKey="Byblow W" first="Winston D." last="Byblow">Winston D. Byblow</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Movement Disorders</title><title level="j" type="sub">Official Journal of the Movement Disorder Society</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Mov. Disord.</title><idno type="ISSN">0885-3185</idno><idno type="eISSN">1531-8257</idno><imprint><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><pubPlace>Hoboken</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2004-11">2004-11</date><biblScope unit="vol">19</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">11</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="1312">1312</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="1317">1317</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0885-3185</idno></series><idno type="istex">4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1002/mds.20160</idno><idno type="ArticleID">MDS20160</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0885-3185</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>focal hand dystonia</term><term>intracortical inhibition</term><term>transcranial magnetic stimulation</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Differences between control and focal hand dystonia (FHD) subject groups in short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) as determined by paired transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be difficult to demonstrate, due to interindividual differences. The purpose of this study was to compare two TMS methods for assessing SICI in 8 control and 7 FHD subjects. Electromyographic (EMG) data were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of the dominant hands of the control subjects and affected hands of the FHD subjects. The first method used a conventional approach of setting conditioning stimulus intensity to 80% of rest threshold (RTh) and test stimulus intensity to 120% RTh. Three interstimulus intervals (ISIs) were used: 2 msec, 3 msec, and the ISI between 2 and 3 msec that produced optimal SICI. The second method was novel in that test stimulus intensity was set to 150% active threshold (ATh), and conditioning stimulus intensity was varied between 50% and 100% ATh. The latter was determined at the threshold for SICI and expressed as a ratio of ATh. There was no difference between the subject groups in the degree of SICI produced using the first method, at the three ISIs studied. However, using the second method, the SICI threshold:ATh ratio was found to be significantly higher for FHD subjects. This finding suggests that determining the SICI threshold:ATh ratio may be a more sensitive measure of intracortical inhibitory function than more conventional methods. © 2004 Movement Disorder Society</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Cathy M. Stinear BSc, PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Winston D. Byblow BHK, MSc, PhD</name><affiliations><json:string>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>intracortical inhibition</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>transcranial magnetic stimulation</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>focal hand dystonia</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><abstract>Differences between control and focal hand dystonia (FHD) subject groups in short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) as determined by paired transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be difficult to demonstrate, due to interindividual differences. The purpose of this study was to compare two TMS methods for assessing SICI in 8 control and 7 FHD subjects. Electromyographic (EMG) data were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of the dominant hands of the control subjects and affected hands of the FHD subjects. The first method used a conventional approach of setting conditioning stimulus intensity to 80% of rest threshold (RTh) and test stimulus intensity to 120% RTh. Three interstimulus intervals (ISIs) were used: 2 msec, 3 msec, and the ISI between 2 and 3 msec that produced optimal SICI. The second method was novel in that test stimulus intensity was set to 150% active threshold (ATh), and conditioning stimulus intensity was varied between 50% and 100% ATh. The latter was determined at the threshold for SICI and expressed as a ratio of ATh. There was no difference between the subject groups in the degree of SICI produced using the first method, at the three ISIs studied. However, using the second method, the SICI threshold:ATh ratio was found to be significantly higher for FHD subjects. This finding suggests that determining the SICI threshold:ATh ratio may be a more sensitive measure of intracortical inhibitory function than more conventional methods. © 2004 Movement Disorder Society</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>7.183</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>594 x 792 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>1538</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>4291</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>26472</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>6</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>241</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia</title><genre><json:string>Serial article</json:string></genre><host><volume>19</volume><pages><total>6</total><last>1317</last><first>1312</first></pages><issn><json:string>0885-3185</json:string></issn><issue>11</issue><subject><json:item><value>Brief Report</value></json:item></subject><genre></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><title>Movement Disorders</title><doi><json:string>10.1002/(ISSN)1531-8257</json:string></doi></host><publicationDate>2004</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2004</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1002/mds.20160</json:string></doi><id>4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B</id><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader type="text"><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><pubPlace>Hoboken</pubPlace><availability><p>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</p></availability><date>2004</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note>Foundation for Research, Science, and Technology</note><note>Mr. P. Baines</note><note>University of Auckland Graduate Research Fund</note><note>Neurological Foundation of New Zealand</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia</title><author><persName><forename type="first">Cathy M.</forename><surname>Stinear</surname><roleName type="degree">BSc, PhD</roleName></persName><note type="correspondence"><p>Correspondence: Human Motor Control Laboratory, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand</p></note><affiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</affiliation></author><author><persName><forename type="first">Winston D.</forename><surname>Byblow</surname><roleName type="degree">BHK, MSc, PhD</roleName></persName><affiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Movement Disorders</title><title level="j" type="sub">Official Journal of the Movement Disorder Society</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Mov. Disord.</title><idno type="pISSN">0885-3185</idno><idno type="eISSN">1531-8257</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1002/(ISSN)1531-8257</idno><imprint><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><pubPlace>Hoboken</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2004-11"></date><biblScope unit="vol">19</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">11</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="1312">1312</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="1317">1317</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1002/mds.20160</idno><idno type="ArticleID">MDS20160</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2004</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Differences between control and focal hand dystonia (FHD) subject groups in short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) as determined by paired transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be difficult to demonstrate, due to interindividual differences. The purpose of this study was to compare two TMS methods for assessing SICI in 8 control and 7 FHD subjects. Electromyographic (EMG) data were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of the dominant hands of the control subjects and affected hands of the FHD subjects. The first method used a conventional approach of setting conditioning stimulus intensity to 80% of rest threshold (RTh) and test stimulus intensity to 120% RTh. Three interstimulus intervals (ISIs) were used: 2 msec, 3 msec, and the ISI between 2 and 3 msec that produced optimal SICI. The second method was novel in that test stimulus intensity was set to 150% active threshold (ATh), and conditioning stimulus intensity was varied between 50% and 100% ATh. The latter was determined at the threshold for SICI and expressed as a ratio of ATh. There was no difference between the subject groups in the degree of SICI produced using the first method, at the three ISIs studied. However, using the second method, the SICI threshold:ATh ratio was found to be significantly higher for FHD subjects. This finding suggests that determining the SICI threshold:ATh ratio may be a more sensitive measure of intracortical inhibitory function than more conventional methods. © 2004 Movement Disorder Society</p></abstract><textClass xml:lang="en"><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>Keywords</head><item><term>intracortical inhibition</term></item><item><term>transcranial magnetic stimulation</term></item><item><term>focal hand dystonia</term></item></list></keywords></textClass><textClass><keywords scheme="Journal Subject"><list><head>Article category</head><item><term>Brief Report</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2003-09-25">Received</change><change when="2004-03-04">Registration</change><change when="2004-11">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisherName><publisherLoc>Hoboken</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi registered="yes">10.1002/(ISSN)1531-8257</doi><issn type="print">0885-3185</issn><issn type="electronic">1531-8257</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="MDS"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" xml:lang="en" sort="MOVEMENT DISORDERS">Movement Disorders</title><title type="subtitle">Official Journal of the Movement Disorder Society</title><title type="short">Mov. Disord.</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="110"><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1002/mds.v19:11</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="19">19</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue">11</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2004-11">November 2004</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="70" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1002/mds.20160</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="MDS20160"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="6"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="articleCategory">Brief Report</title><title type="tocHeading1">Brief Reports</title></titleGroup><copyright ownership="thirdParty">Copyright © 2004 Movement Disorder Society</copyright><eventGroup><event type="manuscriptReceived" date="2003-09-25"></event><event type="manuscriptRevised" date="2004-02-26"></event><event type="manuscriptAccepted" date="2004-03-04"></event><event type="publishedOnlineEarlyUnpaginated" date="2004-06-10"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="2004-06-10"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2004-10-18"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:JWSART34_TO_WML3G version:2.3.6 mode:FullText source:FullText result:FullText mathml2tex" date="2010-04-21"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-02-02"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-31"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst">1312</numbering><numbering type="pageLast">1317</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Human Motor Control Laboratory, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand</correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:MDS.MDS20160.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="2"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="1"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="27"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="4108"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" xml:lang="en">Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia</title><title type="short" xml:lang="en">Elevated ICI Threshold in FHD</title></titleGroup><creators><creator xml:id="au1" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1" corresponding="yes"><personName><givenNames>Cathy M.</givenNames><familyName>Stinear</familyName><degrees>BSc, PhD</degrees></personName><contactDetails><email>c.stinear@auckland.ac.nz</email></contactDetails></creator><creator xml:id="au2" creatorRole="author" affiliationRef="#af1"><personName><givenNames>Winston D.</givenNames><familyName>Byblow</familyName><degrees>BHK, MSc, PhD</degrees></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="af1" countryCode="NZ" type="organization"><unparsedAffiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en" type="author"><keyword xml:id="kwd1">intracortical inhibition</keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd2">transcranial magnetic stimulation</keyword><keyword xml:id="kwd3">focal hand dystonia</keyword></keywordGroup><fundingInfo><fundingAgency>Foundation for Research, Science, and Technology</fundingAgency></fundingInfo><fundingInfo><fundingAgency>Mr. P. Baines</fundingAgency></fundingInfo><fundingInfo><fundingAgency>University of Auckland Graduate Research Fund</fundingAgency></fundingInfo><fundingInfo><fundingAgency>Neurological Foundation of New Zealand</fundingAgency></fundingInfo><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><title type="main">Abstract</title><p>Differences between control and focal hand dystonia (FHD) subject groups in short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) as determined by paired transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be difficult to demonstrate, due to interindividual differences. The purpose of this study was to compare two TMS methods for assessing SICI in 8 control and 7 FHD subjects. Electromyographic (EMG) data were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of the dominant hands of the control subjects and affected hands of the FHD subjects. The first method used a conventional approach of setting conditioning stimulus intensity to 80% of rest threshold (RTh) and test stimulus intensity to 120% RTh. Three interstimulus intervals (ISIs) were used: 2 msec, 3 msec, and the ISI between 2 and 3 msec that produced optimal SICI. The second method was novel in that test stimulus intensity was set to 150% active threshold (ATh), and conditioning stimulus intensity was varied between 50% and 100% ATh. The latter was determined at the threshold for SICI and expressed as a ratio of ATh. There was no difference between the subject groups in the degree of SICI produced using the first method, at the three ISIs studied. However, using the second method, the SICI threshold:ATh ratio was found to be significantly higher for FHD subjects. This finding suggests that determining the SICI threshold:ATh ratio may be a more sensitive measure of intracortical inhibitory function than more conventional methods. © 2004 Movement Disorder Society</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><!--Version 0.6 générée le 3-12-2015--><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Elevated ICI Threshold in FHD</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Cathy M.</namePart><namePart type="family">Stinear</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">BSc, PhD</namePart><affiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</affiliation><description>Correspondence: Human Motor Control Laboratory, Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Winston D.</namePart><namePart type="family">Byblow</namePart><namePart type="termsOfAddress">BHK, MSc, PhD</namePart><affiliation>Human Motor Control Laboratory, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre authority="originalCategForm">article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Hoboken</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2004-11</dateIssued><dateCaptured encoding="w3cdtf">2003-09-25</dateCaptured><dateValid encoding="w3cdtf">2004-03-04</dateValid><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2004</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="figures">2</extent><extent unit="tables">1</extent><extent unit="references">27</extent><extent unit="words">4108</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Differences between control and focal hand dystonia (FHD) subject groups in short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) as determined by paired transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) can be difficult to demonstrate, due to interindividual differences. The purpose of this study was to compare two TMS methods for assessing SICI in 8 control and 7 FHD subjects. Electromyographic (EMG) data were recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle of the dominant hands of the control subjects and affected hands of the FHD subjects. The first method used a conventional approach of setting conditioning stimulus intensity to 80% of rest threshold (RTh) and test stimulus intensity to 120% RTh. Three interstimulus intervals (ISIs) were used: 2 msec, 3 msec, and the ISI between 2 and 3 msec that produced optimal SICI. The second method was novel in that test stimulus intensity was set to 150% active threshold (ATh), and conditioning stimulus intensity was varied between 50% and 100% ATh. The latter was determined at the threshold for SICI and expressed as a ratio of ATh. There was no difference between the subject groups in the degree of SICI produced using the first method, at the three ISIs studied. However, using the second method, the SICI threshold:ATh ratio was found to be significantly higher for FHD subjects. This finding suggests that determining the SICI threshold:ATh ratio may be a more sensitive measure of intracortical inhibitory function than more conventional methods. © 2004 Movement Disorder Society</abstract><note type="funding">Foundation for Research, Science, and Technology</note><note type="funding">Mr. P. Baines</note><note type="funding">University of Auckland Graduate Research Fund</note><note type="funding">Neurological Foundation of New Zealand</note><subject lang="en"><genre>Keywords</genre><topic>intracortical inhibition</topic><topic>transcranial magnetic stimulation</topic><topic>focal hand dystonia</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Movement Disorders</title><subTitle>Official Journal of the Movement Disorder Society</subTitle></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>Mov. Disord.</title></titleInfo><subject><genre>article category</genre><topic>Brief Report</topic></subject><identifier type="ISSN">0885-3185</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1531-8257</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1002/(ISSN)1531-8257</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">MDS</identifier><part><date>2004</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>19</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>11</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>1312</start><end>1317</end><total>6</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1002/mds.20160</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">MDS20160</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">Copyright © 2004 Movement Disorder Society</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordOrigin>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</recordOrigin><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/MovDisordV3/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000920 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000920 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= MovDisordV3
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:4EEE6578689213B23138848E9190CE017527AB5B
|texte= Elevated threshold for intracortical inhibition in focal hand dystonia
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.23. |  |