Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) enhances motor skill and learning in relatively simple motor tasks, but it is unclear if c-tDCS can improve motor performance in complex motor tasks. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of c-tDCS applied over multiple days on motor learning in a complex overhand throwing task. In a double-blind, randomized, between-subjects, SHAM-controlled, experimental design, 30 young adults were assigned to either a c-tDCS or a SHAM group. Participants completed three identical experiments on consecutive days that involved overhand throwing in a pre-test block, five practice blocks with concurrent c-tDCS, and a post-test block. Overhand throwing endpoint accuracy was quantified as the endpoint error. The first dorsal interosseous muscle motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to quantify primary motor cortex (M1) excitability modulations via c-tDCS. Endpoint error significantly decreased over the 3 days of practice, but the magnitude of decrease was not significantly different between the c-tDCS and SHAM group. Similarly, MEP amplitude slightly increased from the pre-tests to the post-tests, but these increases did not differ between groups. These results indicate that multi-day c-tDCS does not improve motor learning in an overhand throwing task or increase M1 excitability.

Intracortical facilitation (ICF) is a paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measurement used to quantify interneuron activity in the primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy populations and motor disorders. Due to the prevalence of the technique, most of the stimulation parameters to optimize ICF quantification have been established. However, the underappreciated methodological issue of the time between ICF trials (inter-trial interval; ITI) has been unstandardized, and different ITIs have never been compared in a paired-pulse TMS study. This is important because single-pulse TMS studies have found motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude reductions over time during TMS trial blocks for short, but not long ITIs. The primary purpose was to determine the influence of different ITIs on the measurement of ICF. Twenty adults completed one experimental session that involved 4 separate ICF trial blocks with each utilizing a different ITI (4, 6, 8, and 10 s). Two-way ANOVAs indicated no significant ITI main effects for test MEP amplitudes, condition-test MEP amplitudes, and therefore ICF. Accordingly, all ITIs studied provided nearly identical ICF values when averaged over entire trial blocks. Therefore, it is recommended that ITIs of 4–6 s be utilized for ICF quantification to optimize participant comfort and experiment time efficiency.