[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
About the Journal & Policies
Editorial Board
Articles Archive::
Current Issue
All Issues
Guide for Authors::
Author instructions
Guide for publishing in journal
Submission Form
Author's consent form
For Reviewers::
Reviewers Section
Ethical Statements::
Registration::
Registration Form
Site Facilities::
Site map
Inform to friends
Contact us::
Contact Information
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
Copyright Policies

 

AWT IMAGE

 
..
Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.

..
:: Volume 12, Issue 1 (Winter 2023) ::
Shefaye Khatam 2023, 12(1): 22-33 Back to browse issues page
The Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Linear and Nonlinear EEG Signal Characteristics in Contamination Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Patients
Fateme Asadollahzadeh Shamkhal , Ali Moghimi * , Hamidreza Kobravi , Javad Salehi Fadardi
Rayan Research Center for Neuroscience and Behavior, Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran , moghimi@um.ac.ir
Abstract:   (761 Views)
Introduction: Contamination Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (C-OCD) is one of the most common subtypes of OCD. Recently, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been suggested as a new solution for improving symptoms in patients with OCD. Evaluating the effectiveness of tDCS through electroencephalogram (EEG) signals can provide a better estimate of improvement and reveal how tDCS leads to changes in the dynamics and features of brain signals. Selecting the optimal features of EEG signals among different features is necessary to show the impact of tDCS. Hence, this study aimed to identify features that undergo substantial changes following tDCS intervention. Materials and Methods: 10 patients with C-OCD received 20 minutes of tDCS in 10 sessions. The cathode electrode was placed on the left orbitofrontal cortex, and the anode on the cerebellar area. Before and after receiving tDCS, the Yale-Brown Obsession scale (Y-BOCS) was completed, and EEG signals were recorded at rest with open and closed eyes. Then, features such as Fuzzy Synchronization Likelihood (FSL), power spectrum, and Recurrence Quantification Analysis (RQA) were extracted from the EEG signals. Then, the Relief algorithm selected optimal features based on tDCS effectiveness. Results: The Relief algorithm revealed that RQA indices were more optimal for reflecting tDCS impact compared to other features among those extracted from EEG signals. Moreover, the DET and Lmax values significantly increased after tDCS intervention. Conclusion: By influencing neural interactions and balancing neuronal activity, tDCS has caused changes in the brain complexity of patients with C-OCD. As a result, there is a correlation between the effectiveness estimated by the Y-BOCS and the features selected by the relief algorithm. tDCS alters brain complexity in EEG compared with other features in C-OCD patients.
 
Keywords: Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation, Electroencephalography, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Full-Text [PDF 911 kb]   (190 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research --- Open Access, CC-BY-NC | Subject: Cognitive Neuroscience
References
1. Stein, D.J., et al., Obsessive-compulsive disorder. Nature reviews Disease primers, 2019. 5(1):52. [DOI:10.1038/s41572-019-0102-3]
2. Robbins, T.W., M.M. Vaghi, and P. Banca, Obsessive-compulsive disorder: puzzles and prospects. Neuron. 2019. 102: 27-47. [DOI:10.1016/j.neuron.2019.01.046]
3. Brady, R.E., T.G. Adams, and J.M. Lohr, Disgust in contamination-based obsessive-compulsive disorder: a review and model. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics. 2010. 10:1295-1305. [DOI:10.1586/ern.10.46]
4. Pittenger, C., M.H. Bloch, and K. Williams, Glutamate abnormalities in obsessive compulsive disorder: Neurobiology, pathophysiology, and treatment. Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2011;132: 314-332. [DOI:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2011.09.006]
5. Westenberg, H.G.M., N.A. Fineberg, and D. Denys, Neurobiology of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Serotonin and Beyond. CNS Spectrums. 2007;12:14-27. [DOI:10.1017/S1092852900002479]
6. Brunelin, J., et al., Transcranial direct current stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder: a systematic review. Brain sciences. 2018. 8:37. [DOI:10.3390/brainsci8020037]
7. Altuğlu, T.B., et al., Prediction of treatment resistance in obsessive compulsive disorder patients based on EEG complexity as a biomarker. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2020;131: 716-724. [DOI:10.1016/j.clinph.2019.11.063]
8. Zaboski, B.A., et al., Electroencephalographic correlates and predictors of treatment outcome in OCD: a brief narrative review. Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2021;12:703398. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyt.2021.703398]
9. Pogarell, O., et al., Symptom-specific EEG power correlations in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Int J Psychophysiol. 2006; 62:87-92. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.02.002]
10. Golnar-Nik, P., S. Farashi, and M.-S. Safari, The application of EEG power for the prediction and interpretation of consumer decision-making: A neuromarketing study. Physiology & Behavior. 2019. 207:90-98. [DOI:10.1016/j.physbeh.2019.04.025]
11. Esfahani, S.R., et al., Reliability and Validity of the Persian version of the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive scale (Y-BOCS). Iranian Journal of Psychiatry & Clinical Psychology. 2012;17.
12. Goodman, W.K., et al., The yale-brown obsessive compulsive scale: II. Validity. Archives of general psychiatry. 1989;46:1012-016. [DOI:10.1001/archpsyc.1989.01810110054008]
13. Pelletier, S.J. and F. Cicchetti, Cellular and molecular mechanisms of action of transcranial direct current stimulation: evidence from in vitro and in vivo models. International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology. 2015;18: 1-13. [DOI:10.1093/ijnp/pyu047]
14. Podda, M.V., et al. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation boosts synaptic plasticity and memory in mice via epigenetic regulation of Bdnf expression. Scientific reports. 2016; 6: 22180. [DOI:10.1038/srep22180]
15. Metin, S.Z., et al., Use of EEG for predicting treatment response to transcranial magnetic stimulation in obsessive compulsive disorder. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience. 2020;51:139-145. [DOI:10.1177/1550059419879569]
16. Mutanen, T., J. Nieminen, and R. Ilmoniemi, TMS-evoked changes in brain-state dynamics quantified by using EEG data. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2013. 7. [DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00155]
17. Acharya, U.R., et al., Application of recurrence quantification analysis for the automated identification of epileptic EEG signals. International journal of neural systems. 2011;21:199-211. [DOI:10.1142/S0129065711002808]
18. Ahmadlou, M. and H. Adeli, Fuzzy synchronization likelihood with application to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Clinical EEG and Neuroscience. 2011; 42:6-13. [DOI:10.1177/155005941104200105]
19. Montez, T., et al., Synchronization likelihood with explicit time-frequency priors. Neuroimage. 2006. 33:1117-1125. [DOI:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.06.066]
20. Kira, K. and L.A. Rendell. The feature selection problem: Traditional methods and a new algorithm. in Proceedings of the tenth national conference on Artificial intelligence. 1992.
21. Robnik-Šikonja, M. and I. Kononenko, Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of ReliefF and RReliefF. Machine Learning. 2003. 53: 23-69. [DOI:10.1023/A:1025667309714]
22. Talebi, N., A.M. Nasrabadi, and T. Curran, Investigation of changes in EEG complexity during memory retrieval: the effect of midazolam. Cogn Neurodyn. 2012. 6:537-46. [DOI:10.1007/s11571-012-9214-0]
23. Thomasson, N., et al., Nonlinear EEG Changes Associated with Clinical Improvement in Depressed Patients. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences. 2000; 4:203-18. [DOI:10.1023/A:1009580427443]

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Asadollahzadeh Shamkhal F, Moghimi A, Kobravi H, Salehi Fadardi J. The Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Linear and Nonlinear EEG Signal Characteristics in Contamination Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Patients. Shefaye Khatam 2023; 12 (1) :22-33
URL: http://shefayekhatam.ir/article-1-2433-en.html
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 12, Issue 1 (Winter 2023) Back to browse issues page
مجله علوم اعصاب شفای خاتم The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 45 queries by YEKTAWEB 4657