| Literature DB >> 32722542 |
Chaoming Fang1, Bowei He2, Yixuan Wang1, Jin Cao3, Shuo Gao1,4.
Abstract
In the field of rehabilitation, the electromyography (EMG) signal plays an important role in interpreting patients' intentions and physical conditions. Nevertheless, utilizing merely the EMG signal suffers from difficulty in recognizing slight body movements, and the detection accuracy is strongly influenced by environmental factors. To address the above issues, multisensory integration-based EMG pattern recognition (PR) techniques have been developed in recent years, and fruitful results have been demonstrated in diverse rehabilitation scenarios, such as achieving high locomotion detection and prosthesis control accuracy. Owing to the importance and rapid development of the EMG centered multisensory fusion technologies in rehabilitation, this paper reviews both theories and applications in this emerging field. The principle of EMG signal generation and the current pattern recognition process are explained in detail, including signal preprocessing, feature extraction, classification algorithms, etc. Mechanisms of collaborations between two important multisensory fusion strategies (kinetic and kinematics) and EMG information are thoroughly explained; corresponding applications are studied, and the pros and cons are discussed. Finally, the main challenges in EMG centered multisensory pattern recognition are discussed, and a future research direction of this area is prospected.Entities:
Keywords: electromyography; multisensory; pattern recognition; rehabilitation
Year: 2020 PMID: 32722542 PMCID: PMC7460307 DOI: 10.3390/bios10080085
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosensors (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6374
Figure 1The conceptual depiction of the application scenarios of the electromyography (EMG) pattern recognition technique.
Figure 2The principle of generation of the EMG signal. (a) the structure of the neuro-muscular system. (b) the schematic of the EMG signal transduction in the nerve and muscle system.
Figure 3Two types of upper limb patterns. (a) the limb position, adopted from [25]. (b) hand gestures, adopted from [27].
Figure 4The two commonly studied lower-limb patterns, i.e., locomotion modes and gait phase. Five locomotion modes, along with the definition of the eight-phases gait cycle, are presented here.
Figure 5The pipeline of performing EMG pattern recognition.
Figure 6Longitudinal representation of the muscle groups of (a) the lower limb (shank and thigh). (b) the upper limb (elbow and hand).
Summary of the selected muscle group for detecting electromyography (EMG) signals.
| No. | Proximal Muscle | Distal Muscle | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| [ | SAR, RF, VL, VM, GRA, | / | Gluteal muscles (gluteus maximus and gluteus medius) on the amputated side and the thigh muscles of the residual limb were monitored |
| [ | RF, VL, VM, BFL, | / | The accurate electrodes locations are adjusted according to the able-bodied subjects and transfemoral subjects |
| [ | SAR, RF, VL, VM, GRA, | / | It should be noted that the locations of EMG electrodes on the distal muscles were approximate |
| [ | / | TA, SL | Although only two muscles are selected, the classification accuracy is still satisfying |
| [ | TPA, DPA, PMC, BCL, TBL, FCR, ECR | / | One of the eight signal channels is used for the synchronization of data from the Fastrack while the left seven are utilized to collect muscle activities signal. |
| [ | / | FDS, FDP, EDC, EIP, EMP | These selected muscles are responsible for controlling all fingers except the thumb. |
| [ | AM, GM, PRF, VL, VM | / | The proximal hip muscle groups have higher rates of the change in EMG activation with regard to different walking speeds while the distal knee extensor muscle groups show higher rates of change for different waling slopes |
| [ | GM, RF, VL, BFL | TA, GA, SL | Humans often change gait patterns to prevent overexertion and possible injury to the relatively small dorsiflexor muscles, which are walking close to maximum capacity. |
| [ | RF, VL, SEM | These three thigh muscles are the most commonly used muscles to classify locomotion modes at different speeds. | |
| [ | BF, RF | MG, TA | To reflect the effect of gait speed and gender on joint motion of lower extremity more comprehensively, bilateral lumbar erectors spinae are also utilized besides the muscles mentioned before. |
Muscles: TA = Tibialis Anterior; SL = Soleus; SAR = Sartorius; RF = rectus femoris; VL = vastus lateralis, VM = vastus medialis; GRA = gracilis; BFL = biceps femoris long head; SEM = semitendinosus; BFS = biceps femoris short head; ADM = adductor magnus.
Figure 7EMG-centered multisensory strategies and sensing blocks.
Figure 8The fusion strategy of combining kinematics data (IMU) and EMG data, adopted from [112].
Figure 9EMG-FSR fusion strategy and hardware diagram used to classify different hand gestures, adopted from [27].
Figure 10EMG-GRF fusion strategy and the fusion pipeline to recognize different locomotion modes adapted from [27].
Figure 11Multisensory fusion strategy using EMG, kinematic sensors, and kinetic sensors together for the application of rehabilitation exoskeleton, adopted from [122].
Summary of the pattern recognition techniques applied in relevant studies.
| No. | Applied Sensors | Classes | Feature | Classifier | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | EMG + GRF | Five common locomotion modes (W, RA, RD, SA, SD) and eight task transitions: W->SA, W->SD, W->RA, W->RD, SA->W, SD->W, RA->W and RD->W | EMG data feature: MAV, SL, SSC and ZC, mechanical signals: maximum, minimum, mean value and standard deviation | Entropy-based adaptation (EBA), Learning form testing data (LIFT) and Transductive Support Vector Machine (TSVM) | EBA: 95%, LIFT: 95% and TSVM: 96.25%, vanilla SVM: 87.5% |
| [ | EMG + GRF | Locomotion modes: LW, SO, SA, SD, RA and RD and related transitions: W->sA, W->RA, W->O, SD->W, RD->W, SA/RA->W, W->SD/RD | EMG time-domain feature: MAV, SSC, WL, ZC, Mechanical signal features: maximum, minimum, mean value of each direction of force and moment | SVM | 99% or higher accuracy in the stance phase and 95% accuracy in the swing phase |
| [ | Position sensors, GRF, interaction force EMG | Five walking environments: LW, RA, RD, SA, and SD | GRF feature: four positions in the foot for four time periods, position feature: three joint angles for four time periods. Interaction force feature: two points in the link for four time periods, sEMG feature: MAV, ZC, SSC and WL | BLDA | 96.1%(environment classification accuracy) |
| [ | EMG sensor, pressure force sensor | Finger gestures, wrist gestures, and other gestures | Root mean square (RMS), standard deviation (SD) and peak amplitude | SVM | 95.8% |
| [ | IMU, EMG sensor | Six hand gestures (forward, clockwise, left, backward, anticlockwise, right) | Nine IMU features extracted from wrist Euler angle and six EMG features extracted from EMG RMS signal | DSVM | Real-time recognition accuracy 90.5% |
| [ | EMG signal acquisition system, data glove | Thumb flexion, finger flexion, thumb opposition, middle/ring/little finger flexion, long fingers flexion, tradigital grasp, lateral grip/key grip | MAV (mean of absolute value) | Locally weighted learning | 79% for amputee and 89% for non-disabled participants |
Classes: LW = level-ground walking; RA = ramp ascent; RD = ramp descent; SA = stairs ascent; SD = stairs descent; SO = stepping over an obstacle; IT = ipsilateral turning; CT = contralateral turning; SS = standing still; LP = loading response; MST = midstance; TST = terminal stance; PS = pre-swing; IS = initial swing; MS = mid-swing; TS = terminal swing. Feature: MAV = mean absolute value; ZC = zero crossing; SSC = slope sign changes; WL = waveform length; SL = signal length.
Figure 12The procedure of applying High-Density EMG (HD-EMG) in discriminating hand gestures, adopted from [126].
Figure 13A conceptual depiction of: (a) the overlapping windowing method. (b) the non-overlapping windowing method.
Figure 14The schematic of utilizing biomechanical based and EMG centered multisensory technique in controlling a robotic hand, adopted from [134].