| Literature DB >> 20492680 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with severe physical disabilities and minimal motor behaviour may be unable to use conventional mechanical switches for access. These persons may benefit from access technologies that harness the volitional activity of muscles. In this study, we describe the design and demonstrate the performance of a binary switch controlled by mechanomyogram (MMG) signals recorded from the frontalis muscle during eyebrow movements.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20492680 PMCID: PMC2890628 DOI: 10.1186/1743-0003-7-22
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil ISSN: 1743-0003 Impact factor: 4.262
Figure 1Switch activation scheme. Here x, xmmg and xhf are the microphone, MMG and high-frequency filtered signals, respectively; γ is the threshold scaling factor; z is the muscle-contraction event signal; and τ is the threshold that separates contraction from sensor movement.
Figure 2Signal denoising. The microphone signal and RMS values of the low-frequency (MMG) and high-frequency filtered signals during contraction and movement.
Figure 3Typical MMG signal recorded from the frontalis muscle during quick and sustained eye-brow raises, eye blinks and head movement.
Figure 4Typical CWT coefficients of MMG recorded at the frontalis muscle. The maximum coefficients at 14 scales are shown for different contraction conditions. The dashed lines depict CWT coefficients of the artefact in the MMG signal during rest, eye blinks and head movements. The maximum coefficients across the artefacts are the scale-specific thresholds (x) for contraction-detection. The solid lines depict coefficients for the events to be detected. Contractions are detected when the CWT coefficient of at least one scale is higher than the threshold. After the initial signal transient, sustained contractions could not be detected.
Figure 5Schematic diagram of equipment set-up.
Performance metrics for the eyebrow switch.
| Participant | Contraction detection | Attempt rating | Effort rating | Slope of response time | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | Specificity | 95% CI of slope (ms/min) | ||||
| B1 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1 | 2 | -10.25 | -1.75 |
| A1 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1 | 2 | -4.17 | -0.31 |
| A2 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1 | 2 | -9.71 | -0.11 |
| A3 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1 | 2 | -0.15 | 6.77 |
| A4 | 1.000 | 0.997 | 2 | 2 | -4.19 | 4.92 |
| A5 | 0.990 | 1.000 | 2 | 2 | -1.59 | 2.55 |
| A6 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 2 | 3 | -5.83 | 3.57 |
| A7 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 2 | 1 | -4.36 | 5.35 |
| A8 | 0.990 | 1.000 | 1 | 2 | -14.64 | -5.84 |
| A9 | 0.990 | 0.997 | 2 | 3 | -2.33 | 9.54 |
| A10 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1 | 2 | 5.84 | 11.69 |
| Average | 0.997 ± 0.004 | 0.999 ± 0.001 | 1.45 ± 0.5 | 2.1 ± 0.5 | -4.67 ± 5.5 | 3.30 ± 5.1 |
Multiple attempt rating: Did you have to try more than once before activating the switch? [1-Never; 2- Very infrequently; 3- Sometimes; 4- Very often; 5- Almost all the time]
Effort rating: How much effort was required to activate the switch? [1-Nothing at all, not tired; 2- A little, not tired; 3- Moderate, a little tired; 4- A lot, tired; 5-Too much, very tired]
CI -confidence interval; Slope units: response time (ms)/elapsed experiment time (min)