Literature DB >> 15234680

Functional evaluation of natural sensory feedback incorporated in a hand grasp neuroprosthesis.

Andreas Inmann1, Morten Haugland.   

Abstract

We investigated whether automatic control of a hand grasp neuroprosthesis by means of signals from natural sensors in the skin of the index finger can mimic the natural control of grasp force in an important task of daily living, namely eating. We designed a simulated eating task with the same ratio of rest and activity as was found on average in a video analysis of three meals consumed in a social environment. An instrumented fork measured grasp force as well as the force in the long axis and perpendicular to the long axis at the tip of the fork. The simulated eating task was performed by a tetraplegic volunteer using a hand grasp neuroprosthesis both with and without use of feedback from the natural sensors. Further, 10 able-bodied volunteers performed the task with the same (lateral) grasp as the tetraplegic volunteer to obtain measures for improving the control strategy of the hand grasp neuroprosthesis. We have shown that a hand grasp neuroprosthesis incorporating natural sensory feedback can to some extent mimic the natural application of grasp force on a fork during simulated eating. The mean grasp force during active phases was higher than the mean grasp force during inactive phases. The mean grasp force applied during a simulated eating task was reduced by using the system with sensory feedback compared to using the system without sensory feedback.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15234680     DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2004.03.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Eng Phys        ISSN: 1350-4533            Impact factor:   2.242


  7 in total

Review 1.  Neuroprosthetic technology for individuals with spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Jennifer L Collinger; Stephen Foldes; Tim M Bruns; Brian Wodlinger; Robert Gaunt; Douglas J Weber
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.985

Review 2.  The Evolution of Neuroprosthetic Interfaces.

Authors:  Dayo O Adewole; Mijail D Serruya; James P Harris; Justin C Burrell; Dmitriy Petrov; H Isaac Chen; John A Wolf; D Kacy Cullen
Journal:  Crit Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2016

3.  MUNDUS project: MUltimodal neuroprosthesis for daily upper limb support.

Authors:  Alessandra Pedrocchi; Simona Ferrante; Emilia Ambrosini; Marta Gandolla; Claudia Casellato; Thomas Schauer; Christian Klauer; Javier Pascual; Carmen Vidaurre; Margit Gföhler; Werner Reichenfelser; Jakob Karner; Silvestro Micera; Andrea Crema; Franco Molteni; Mauro Rossini; Giovanna Palumbo; Eleonora Guanziroli; Andreas Jedlitschka; Marco Hack; Maria Bulgheroni; Enrico d'Amico; Peter Schenk; Sven Zwicker; Alexander Duschau-Wicke; Justinas Miseikis; Lina Graber; Giancarlo Ferrigno
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 4.262

4.  Classification of naturally evoked compound action potentials in peripheral nerve spatiotemporal recordings.

Authors:  Ryan G L Koh; Adrian I Nachman; José Zariffa
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  A Review of Control Strategies in Closed-Loop Neuroprosthetic Systems.

Authors:  James Wright; Vaughan G Macefield; André van Schaik; Jonathan C Tapson
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 4.677

6.  Separability of neural responses to standardised mechanical stimulation of limbs.

Authors:  Emma Brunton; Christoph W Blau; Kianoush Nazarpour
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Visual Feedback Control of a Rat Ankle Angle Using a Wirelessly Powered Two-Channel Neurostimulator.

Authors:  Masaru Takeuchi; Keita Watanabe; Kanta Ishihara; Taichi Miyamoto; Katsuhiro Tokutake; Sota Saeki; Tadayoshi Aoyama; Yasuhisa Hasegawa; Shigeru Kurimoto; Hitoshi Hirata
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-04-14       Impact factor: 3.576

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.