G R Müller-Putz1, I Daly, V Kaiser. 1. Laboratory of Brain-Computer Interfaces, Institute for Knowledge Discovery, Graz University of Technology, Austria.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Assimilating the diagnosis complete spinal cord injury (SCI) takes time and is not easy, as patients know that there is no 'cure' at the present time. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can facilitate daily living. However, inter-subject variability demands measurements with potential user groups and an understanding of how they differ to healthy users BCIs are more commonly tested with. Thus, a three-class motor imagery (MI) screening (left hand, right hand, feet) was performed with a group of 10 able-bodied and 16 complete spinal-cord-injured people (paraplegics, tetraplegics) with the objective of determining what differences were present between the user groups and how they would impact upon the ability of these user groups to interact with a BCI. APPROACH: Electrophysiological differences between patient groups and healthy users are measured in terms of sensorimotor rhythm deflections from baseline during MI, electroencephalogram microstate scalp maps and strengths of inter-channel phase synchronization. Additionally, using a common spatial pattern algorithm and a linear discriminant analysis classifier, the classification accuracy was calculated and compared between groups. MAIN RESULTS: It is seen that both patient groups (tetraplegic and paraplegic) have some significant differences in event-related desynchronization strengths, exhibit significant increases in synchronization and reach significantly lower accuracies (mean (M) = 66.1%) than the group of healthy subjects (M = 85.1%). SIGNIFICANCE: The results demonstrate significant differences in electrophysiological correlates of motor control between healthy individuals and those individuals who stand to benefit most from BCI technology (individuals with SCI). They highlight the difficulty in directly translating results from healthy subjects to participants with SCI and the challenges that, therefore, arise in providing BCIs to such individuals.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Assimilating the diagnosis complete spinal cord injury (SCI) takes time and is not easy, as patients know that there is no 'cure' at the present time. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) can facilitate daily living. However, inter-subject variability demands measurements with potential user groups and an understanding of how they differ to healthy users BCIs are more commonly tested with. Thus, a three-class motor imagery (MI) screening (left hand, right hand, feet) was performed with a group of 10 able-bodied and 16 complete spinal-cord-injured people (paraplegics, tetraplegics) with the objective of determining what differences were present between the user groups and how they would impact upon the ability of these user groups to interact with a BCI. APPROACH: Electrophysiological differences between patient groups and healthy users are measured in terms of sensorimotor rhythm deflections from baseline during MI, electroencephalogram microstate scalp maps and strengths of inter-channel phase synchronization. Additionally, using a common spatial pattern algorithm and a linear discriminant analysis classifier, the classification accuracy was calculated and compared between groups. MAIN RESULTS: It is seen that both patient groups (tetraplegic and paraplegic) have some significant differences in event-related desynchronization strengths, exhibit significant increases in synchronization and reach significantly lower accuracies (mean (M) = 66.1%) than the group of healthy subjects (M = 85.1%). SIGNIFICANCE: The results demonstrate significant differences in electrophysiological correlates of motor control between healthy individuals and those individuals who stand to benefit most from BCI technology (individuals with SCI). They highlight the difficulty in directly translating results from healthy subjects to participants with SCI and the challenges that, therefore, arise in providing BCIs to such individuals.
Authors: Aljoscha Thomschewski; Anja Ströhlein; Patrick B Langthaler; Elisabeth Schmid; Jonas Potthoff; Peter Höller; Stefan Leis; Eugen Trinka; Yvonne Höller Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 5.152
Authors: Rodrigo Gontijo Cunha; Paulo José Guimarães Da-Silva; Clarissa Cardoso Dos Santos Couto Paz; Ana Carolina da Silva Ferreira; Carlos Julio Tierra-Criollo Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil Date: 2017-04-11 Impact factor: 4.262
Authors: Yvonne Höller; Aljoscha Thomschewski; Andreas Uhl; Arne C Bathke; Raffaele Nardone; Stefan Leis; Eugen Trinka; Peter Höller Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 4.086
Authors: Domen Novak; Roland Sigrist; Nicolas J Gerig; Dario Wyss; René Bauer; Ulrich Götz; Robert Riener Journal: Front Neurosci Date: 2018-01-11 Impact factor: 4.677