Literature DB >> 25356723

Toward an artificial sensory feedback system for prosthetic mobility rehabilitation: examination of sensorimotor responses.

Aman Sharma1, Ricardo Torres-Moreno, Karl Zabjek, Jan Andrysek.   

Abstract

People with lower-limb amputation have reduced mobility due to loss of sensory information, which may be restored by artificial sensory feedback systems built into prostheses. For an effective system, it is important to understand how humans sense, interpret, and respond to the feedback that would be provided. The goal of this study was to examine sensorimotor responses to mobility-relevant stimuli. Three experiments were performed to examine the effects of location of stimuli, frequency of stimuli, and means for providing the response. Stimuli, given as vibrations, were applied to the thigh region, and responses involved leg movements. Sensorimotor reaction time (RT) was measured as the duration between application of the stimulus and initiation of the response. Accuracy of response was also measured. Overall average RTs for one response option were 0.808 +/- 0.142 s, and response accuracies were >90%. Higher frequencies (220 vs 140 Hz) of vibration stimulus provided in anterior regions of the thigh produced the fastest RTs. When participants were presented with more than one stimulus and response option, RTs increased. Findings suggest that long sensorimotor responses may be a limiting factor in the development of an artificial feedback system for mobility rehabilitation applications; however, feed-forward techniques could potentially help to address these limitations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  amputation; biofeedback; lower-limb amputation; mobility rehabilitation; proprioception; reaction time; sensorimotor responses; sensory feedback; transfemoral; vibration

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25356723     DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2013.07.0164

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev        ISSN: 0748-7711


  7 in total

1.  A Method for Evaluating Timeliness and Accuracy of Volitional Motor Responses to Vibrotactile Stimuli.

Authors:  Matthew J Leineweber; Sam Shi; Jan Andrysek
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 1.355

Review 2.  Haptic wearables as sensory replacement, sensory augmentation and trainer - a review.

Authors:  Peter B Shull; Dana D Damian
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2015-07-20       Impact factor: 4.262

3.  Wearable Biofeedback System to Induce Desired Walking Speed in Overground Gait Training.

Authors:  Huanghe Zhang; Yefei Yin; Zhuo Chen; Yufeng Zhang; Ashwini K Rao; Yi Guo; Damiano Zanotto
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-07-18       Impact factor: 3.576

4.  Effects of Combined Balance and Strength Training on Measures of Balance and Muscle Strength in Older Women With a History of Falls.

Authors:  Sghaier Zouita; Hassane Zouhal; Habiba Ferchichi; Thierry Paillard; Catherine Dziri; Anthony C Hackney; Ismail Laher; Urs Granacher; Amira Ben Moussa Zouita
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 4.566

5.  Long-Term Home-Use of Sensory-Motor-Integrated Bidirectional Bionic Prosthetic Arms Promotes Functional, Perceptual, and Cognitive Changes.

Authors:  Jonathon S Schofield; Courtney E Shell; Dylan T Beckler; Zachary C Thumser; Paul D Marasco
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 4.677

6.  Biofeedback Systems for Gait Rehabilitation of Individuals with Lower-Limb Amputation: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Rafael Escamilla-Nunez; Alexandria Michelini; Jan Andrysek
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-03-14       Impact factor: 3.576

7.  Evaluation of Optimal Vibrotactile Feedback for Force-Controlled Upper Limb Myoelectric Prostheses.

Authors:  Andrea Gonzalez-Rodriguez; Jose L Ramon; Vicente Morell; Gabriel J Garcia; Jorge Pomares; Carlos A Jara; Andres Ubeda
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 3.576

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.