| Literature DB >> 25071544 |
Ian Daly1, Josef Faller2, Reinhold Scherer3, Catherine M Sweeney-Reed4, Slawomir J Nasuto5, Martin Billinger2, Gernot R Müller-Putz2.
Abstract
Cerebral palsy (CP) includes a broad range of disorders, which can result in impairment of posture and movement control. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have been proposed as assistive devices for individuals with CP. Better understanding of the neural processing underlying motor control in affected individuals could lead to more targeted BCI rehabilitation and treatment options. We have explored well-known neural correlates of movement, including event-related desynchronization (ERD), phase synchrony, and a recently-introduced measure of phase dynamics, in participants with CP and healthy control participants. Although present, significantly less ERD and phase locking were found in the group with CP. Additionally, inter-group differences in phase dynamics were also significant. Taken together these findings suggest that users with CP exhibit lower levels of motor cortex activation during motor imagery, as reflected in lower levels of ongoing mu suppression and less functional connectivity. These differences indicate that development of BCIs for individuals with CP may pose additional challenges beyond those faced in providing BCIs to healthy individuals.Entities:
Keywords: brain-computer interface (BCI); cerebral palsy; electroencephalogram (EEG); event-related desynchronization (ERD); phase dynamics; phase synchrony; sensorimotor rhythm
Year: 2014 PMID: 25071544 PMCID: PMC4088187 DOI: 10.3389/fneng.2014.00020
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neuroeng ISSN: 1662-6443
Summary of the healthy participants.
| 1 | 32 | F |
| 2 | 21 | M |
| 3 | 26 | F |
| 4 | 27 | M |
| 5 | 26 | M |
| 6 | 22 | F |
| 7 | 28 | F |
| 8 | 26 | M |
| 9 | 28 | M |
| 10 | 26 | M |
| 11 | 22 | M |
| 12 | 25 | F |
Gender is indicated by either M (male) or F (female).
Figure 1BCI paradigms used in training stages of BCI operation by both users with CP and healthy users. (A) BCI paradigm used with healthy participants. (B) BCI paradigm used with participants with cerebral palsy.
Summary of the participants with CP.
| 1 | 53 | M | LLD, ULD |
| 2 | 36 | M | LLD, ULD |
| 3 | 52 | F | LLD |
| 4 | 22 | M | LLD, ULD |
| 5 | 32 | M | LLD |
| 6 | 20 | F | LLD, ULD |
| 7 | 34 | M | LLD, ULD |
| 8 | 58 | F | LLD |
| 9 | 32 | F | LLD |
| 10 | 36 | F | LLD, ULD |
| 11 | 38 | M | LLD, ULD |
| 12 | 36 | F | LLD, ULD |
| 13 | 37 | M | LLD, ULD |
| 14 | 31 | F | LLD, ULD |
Gender is indicated by either M (male) or F (female). Orthopedic disorders are denoted by codes indicating lower limb disorders (LLD) or upper limb disorders (ULD).
Summary of key findings.
| Baseline PLV | < | |
| Relative PLV | > | |
| Relative ERD/S | > | |
| III dynamics | > | |
Summary of significant ERD/S findings.
| Hand | Healthy | Alpha | 4–6 | 0.148 | =0.034 |
| Hand | Healthy | Alpha | 6–8 | 0.180 | =0.033 |
| Hand | Healthy | Mid beta | 4–6 | 0.156 | =0.048 |
| Hand | Healthy | Mid beta | 6–8 | 0.176 | =0.043 |
| Feet | Healthy | Mid beta | 4–6 | 0.239 | =0.004 |
| Feet | Healthy | Mid beta | 6–8 | 0.231 | =0.017 |
| Hand | Healthy | High beta | 4–6 | 0.310 | =0.005 |
Figure 2An example of mean band-power differences from baseline from healthy users and users with CP in the mid beta frequency band during hand MI. The error bars illustrate ±1 standard deviation from the mean.
Summary of significant PLV findings.
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Alpha | 4–6 | 0.268 | =0.013 |
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Alpha | 6–8 | 0.364 | =0.001 |
| Hand, M1-SMA | Healthy | Alpha | 4–6 | 0.167 | =0.034 |
| Hand, M1-SMA | Healthy | Alpha | 6–8 | 0.232 | =0.009 |
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Lower beta | 6–8 | 0.239 | =0.012 |
| Feet, MC | Healthy | Lower beta | 6–8 | 0.183 | =0.009 |
| Hand, M1-SMA | Healthy | Lower beta | 6–8 | 0.225 | =0.012 |
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Mid beta | 4–6 | 0.336 | =0.006 |
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Mid beta | 6–8 | 0.347 | =0.004 |
| Feet, MC | Healthy | Mid beta | 4–6 | 0.202 | =0.025 |
| Feet, MC | Healthy | Mid beta | 6–8 | 0.376 | =0.015 |
| Hand, M1-SMA | Healthy | Mid beta | 6–8 | 0.197 | =0.014 |
| Feet, M1-SMA | Healthy | Mid beta | 4–6 | 0.196 | =0.036 |
| Feet, M1-SMA | Healthy | Mid beta | 6–8 | 0.266 | =0.011 |
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Upper beta | 0–2 | 0.214 | =0.004 |
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Upper beta | 2–4 | 0.268 | =0.003 |
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Upper beta | 4–6 | 0.511 | <0.001 |
| Hand, MC | Healthy | Upper beta | 6–8 | 0.399 | =0.002 |
| Feet, MC | Healthy | Upper beta | 4–6 | 0.169 | =0.021 |
| Hand, M1-SMA | Healthy | Upper beta | 4–6 | 0.341 | =0.005 |
| Hand, M1-SMA | Healthy | Upper beta | 6–8 | 0.303 | =0.009 |
Region denotes the region of the motor cortex considered where MC denotes the whole motor cortex and M1-SMA denotes PLVs between the M1 and SMA regions.
Figure 3An example of mean PLV differences from baseline from healthy users and users with CP in the mid beta frequency band during hand MI. The error bars illustrate ±1 standard deviation from the mean.
Figure 4An example of mean III time series over participants in the alpha (8–13 Hz) frequency band from healthy users and users with CP during hand MI.