Journal of Clinical Medicine Research, ISSN 1918-3003 print, 1918-3011 online, Open Access
Article copyright, the authors; Journal compilation copyright, J Clin Med Res and Elmer Press Inc
Journal website https://jocmr.elmerjournals.com

Original Article

Volume 17, Number 1, January 2025, pages 44-50

Temporal Dynamics of Moderate-Intensity Transcranial Static Magnetic Stimulation in Young Adults

Figures

↓  Figure 1. Diagram of the tSMS intervention measures model. Using a floor-to-ceiling mobile stent to attach a neodymium magnet (south pole) and a non-magnetic stainless steel cylinder to the subject’s C3 scalp. tSMS: transcranial static magnetic stimulation.
Figure 1.
↓  Figure 2. Pattern map of C3 and Fz sites. Based on the international 10-20 system electrode placement method to determine the C3 and Fz sites, SEP is recorded from the C3 (parietal cortex) and Fz (forehead) sites. SEP: somatosensory evoked potential.
Figure 2.
↓  Figure 3. Intervention timeline. T0 represents before stimulation, T1 represents 0 - 2 min after stimulation, T2 represents 5 - 7 min after stimulation, and T3 represents 10 - 12 min after stimulation. A 30-min tSMS or sham stimulation is applied between T0 and T1. tSMS: transcranial static magnetic stimulation.
Figure 3.
↓  Figure 4. SEP wave map: a SEP waveform recorded using electromyography and evoked potential stimulation of the right median nerve. SEP: somatosensory evoked potential.
Figure 4.
↓  Figure 5. A line graph of the mean values for both the intervention and control groups at four time points (T0, T1, T2, T3). In the intervention group, a significant downward trend is observed at T1 time point, which still remains significant at T2. At T3, the downward trend begins to weaken.
Figure 5.
↓  Figure 6. A linear graph of the mean values at four time points for both the intervention and control groups. The mean values at T1, T2, and T3 in the intervention group were significantly different from T0, with the largest difference observed at T2. In contrast, no significant differences were observed in the control group.
Figure 6.
↓  Figure 7. Changes in excitability from T0 to T1 for individual subjects in both the control and intervention groups. In the intervention group, significant differences were found between T0 and T1, while no significant differences were observed in the control group. Additionally, the control group showed large individual differences.
Figure 7.

Tables

↓  Table 1. General Information of Two Groups of Subjects Before Intervention
 
Group Number of cases Age Gender
Male Female
tSMS: transcranial static magnetic stimulation.
tSMS group 20 27.25 ± 7.86 10 10
Sham stimulation group 20 28.40 ± 6.60 6 14
t/χ2 0.501 1.667
P 0.619 0.197

 

↓  Table 2. Description Statistics of Two Groups of Subjects
 
Time point tSMS group (n = 20) Sham stimulation group (n = 20)
Sphericity test P > 0.05, indicating that it meets the sphericity test. tSMS: transcranial static magnetic stimulation.
T0 5.59 ± 1.45 5.9 ± 2.4
T1 4.82 ± 1.54 5.78 ± 2.26
T2 4.66 ± 1.72 5.81 ± 2.28
T3 5.07 ± 1.70 5.87 ± 2.20
Sphericity test P = 0.52

 

↓  Table 3. Comparison of the Two Groups of Subjects Before and After Intervention
 
tSMS group (n = 20) Sham stimulation group (n = 20) t P
aStatistical significance was found between T0 and T1, T0 and T2, and T0 and T3 in the tSMS group (P < 0.05), while no significant differences were observed for the other comparisons (P > 0.05). tSMS: transcranial static magnetic stimulation.
T0 5.59 ± 1.45 5.9 ± 2.4 0.491 0.626
T1 4.82 ± 1.54 5.78 ± 2.26 1.561 0.127
T2 4.66 ± 1.72 5.81 ± 2.28 1.801 0.080
T3 5.07 ± 1.70 5.87 ± 2.20 1.295 0.203
F 8.861 0.382
P 0.008 0.544
Intergroup effect F = 1.743 P = 0.195
Intragroup effect F = 7.735 P < 0.001
Time point groupa F = 4.822 P = 0.003

 

↓  Table 4. Comparison of Time Before and After Intervention in tSMS Group
 
Time point tSMS group time point difference (n = 20) P 95% CI
Statistical significance was observed between T0 and T1, T0 and T2, and T0 and T3 in the tSMS group (P < 0.05), while no statistical significance was found for the other comparisons (P > 0.05). tSMS: transcranial static magnetic stimulation; CI: confidence interval.
T0 and T1 0.77 ± 0.14 < 0.001 0.37, 1.16
T0 and T2 0.93 ± 0.16 < 0.001 0.48, 1.38
T0 and T3 0.52 ± 0.18 0.034 0.03, 1.01
T1 and T2 0.17 ± 0.17 0.910 -0.30, 0.63
T1 and T3 0.25 ± 0.18 0.675 -0.73, 0.24
T2 and T3 0.41 ± 0.15 0.061 -0.83, 0.01

 

↓  Table 5. Comparison of Time Before and After Intervention in Control Group
 
Time point Sham stimulation group time point difference (n = 20) P 95% CI
There was no significant statistical difference between the four time points in the control group (P > 0.05). CI: confidence interval.
T0 and T1 0.12 ± 0.14 0.956 -0.28, 0.52
T0 and T2 0.09 ± 0.16 0.995 -0.36, 0.54
T0 and T3 0.03 ± 0.18 > 0.999 -0.47, 0.52
T1 and T2 0.03 ± 0.17 > 0.999 -0.50, 0.44
T1 and T3 0.10 ± 0.18 0.995 -0.58, 0.39
T2 and T3 0.07 ± 0.15 0.999 -0.49, 0.36