| Literature DB >> 35847664 |
Ping Xie1, Zihao Wang1, Zengyong Li2, Ying Wang1, Nianwen Wang1, Zhenhu Liang1, Juan Wang1, Xiaoling Chen1.
Abstract
It is difficult for stroke patients with flaccid paralysis to receive passive rehabilitation training. Therefore, virtual rehabilitation technology that integrates the motor imagery brain-computer interface and virtual reality technology has been applied to the field of stroke rehabilitation and has evolved into a physical rehabilitation training method. This virtual rehabilitation technology can enhance the initiative and adaptability of patient rehabilitation. To maximize the deep activation of the subjects motor nerves and accelerate the remodeling mechanism of motor nerve function, this study designed a brain-computer interface rehabilitation training strategy using different virtual scenes, including static scenes, dynamic scenes, and VR scenes. Including static scenes, dynamic scenes, and VR scenes. We compared and analyzed the degree of neural activation and the recognition rate of motor imagery in stroke patients after motor imagery training using stimulation of different virtual scenes, The results show that under the three scenarios, The order of degree of neural activation and the recognition rate of motor imagery from high to low is: VR scenes, dynamic scenes, static scenes. This paper provided the research basis for a virtual rehabilitation strategy that could integrate the motor imagery brain-computer interface and virtual reality technology.Entities:
Keywords: brain-computer interface; motor imagery; neural activation; virtual reality; virtual rehabilitation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35847664 PMCID: PMC9284764 DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.892178
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Aging Neurosci ISSN: 1663-4365 Impact factor: 5.702
FIGURE 1Virtual rehabilitation training strategy map.
FIGURE 2Static and dynamic scenes without VR.
FIGURE 3Training scenes in VR enviroment. (A) One scene for computer. (B) One scence for dinner.
FIGURE 4Experimental schematics.
FIGURE 5Assessment paradigm before and after enhanced MI training.
FIGURE 6Experimental paradigm of enhanced MI training in different scenes.
FIGURE 7Spatial distribution of the brain activation between the before and after enhanced MI training. (A) For control group. (B) For experimental group. (C) For experimental group II.
Statistical results of online recognition rate during MI training in different virtual scenes (%).
| Group | Static scenes (control group) | Dynamic scenes (experimental group I) | VR scenes (experimental group II) | ||||||
| Training day | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 | S5 | S6 | S7 | S8 | S9 |
| Day_01 | 60.9% | 55.9% | 57.6% | 61.8% | 58.5% | 62.6% | 62.6% | 59.4% | 60.3% |
| Day_02 | 65.7% | 57.4% | 60.7% | 60.7% | 64.8% | 59.1% | 64.1% | 63.1% | 64.7% |
| Day_03 | 63.4% | 61.6% | 65.2% | 65.1% | 67.4% | 67.4% | 67.4% | 64.8% | 71.1% |
| Day_04 | 69.1% | 59.3% | 61.5% | 69.1% | 59.3% | 65.9% | 71.8% | 71.0% | 73.9% |
| Day_05 | 67.4% | 62.7% | 70.7% | 72.4% | 62.6% | 70.7% | 65.7% | 67.3% | 74.5% |
| Day_06 | 65.9% | 66.5% | 65.9% | 76.8% | 65.7% | 72.6% | 76.8% | 73.5% | 72.2% |
| Day_07 | 56.5% | 65.2% | 67.6% | 70.7% | 70.7% | 70.7% | 72.6% | 74.0% | 70.7% |
| Day_08 | 67.7% | 69.8% | 56.6% | 69.3% | 69.3% | 65.1% | 73.2% | 72.7% | 75.9% |
| Day_09 | 69.3% | 67.3% | 63.5% | 78.2% | 74.3% | 74.3% | 79.3% | 79.2% | 80.8% |
| Day_10 | 72.4% | 72.7% | 65.6% | 72.6% | 77.4% | 67.4% | 76.6% | 76.7% | 74.2% |
| Day_11 | 70.1% | 62.1% | 69.3% | 67.6% | 69.1% | 70.0% | 82.4% | 72.1% | 79.5% |
| Day_12 | 74.9% | 69.3% | 70.7% | 76.6% | 68.4% | 67.5% | 73.4% | 70.4% | 83.0% |
| Day_13 | 68.2% | 67.1% | 71.6% | 72.5% | 70.0% | 73.5% | 78.3% | 76.8% | 75.3% |
| Day_14 | 70.9% | 67.6% | 67.6% | 74.2% | 71.7% | 74.0% | 80.0% | 78.2% | 88.8% |
| Average recognition rate | 67.3% | 64.6% | 65.3% | 70.5% | 67.8% | 68.6% | 73.2% | 71.4% | 74.6% |
| Standard deviation | 0.045 | 0.042 | 0.046 | 0.052 | 0.051 | 0.043 | 0.060 | 0.057 | 0.070 |
*denotes the highest MI recognition rate for each subject across the 14 days.
Offline evaluation of recognition rate on different virtual scenes before, during and after enhanced MI training (%).
| Group | Subjects | Recognition rate before the training | Recognition rate after 7-day training | Increasing range (%) | Recognition rate after 14-day training | Increasing range (%) |
| Static scenes | S1 | 63.6% | 69.7% | 6.1 | 72.8% | 3.1 |
| S2 | 61.6% | 66.1% | 4.5 | 68.9% | 2.8 | |
| S3 | 64.1% | 68.4% | 4.3 | 72.1% | 3.7 | |
| Dynamic scenes | S4 | 63.8% | 69.6% | 5.8 | 74.7% | 5.1 |
| S5 | 64.1% | 71.4% | 7.3 | 76.0% | 4.6 | |
| S6 | 60.7% | 66.4% | 5.7 | 71.3% | 4.9 | |
| VR scenes | S7 | 64.6% | 74.4% | 9.8 | 81.6% | 7.2 |
| S8 | 59.6% | 72.5% | 12.9 | 79.3% | 6.8 | |
| S9 | 62.7% | 73.4% | 10.7 | 80.5% | 7.1 |