{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.039382239382239385, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014671814671814672, 'mean_word_length': 5.384236453201971, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Somatosensory Electrical Stimulation Does Not Augment Motor Skill Acquisition and Intermanual Transfer in Healthy Young Adults-A Pilot Study.

Sensory input can modify motor function and magnify interlimb transfer. We examined the effects of low-intensity somatosensory electrical stimulation (SES) on motor practice-induced skill acquisition and intermanual transfer. Participants practiced a visuomotor skill for 25 min and received SES to the practice or the transfer arm. Responses to single- and double-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation were measured in both extensor carpi radialis. SES did not further increase skill acquisition (motor practice with right hand [RMP]: 30.8% and motor practice with right hand + somatosensory electrical stimulation to the right arm [RMP + RSES]: 27.8%) and intermanual transfer (RMP: 13.6% and RMP + RSES: 9.8%) when delivered to the left arm (motor practice with right hand + somatosensory electrical stimulation to the left arm [RMP + LSES]: 44.8% and 18.6%, respectively). Furthermore, transcranial magnetic stimulation measures revealed no changes in either hand. Future studies should systematically manipulate SES parameters to better understand the mechanisms of how SES affords motor learning benefits documented but not studied in patients.