Are we there yet? Evaluating commercial grade brain–computer interface for control of computer applications by individuals with cerebral palsy

Abstract Purpose: Using a commercial electroencephalography (EEG)-based brain–computer interface (BCI), the training and testing protocol for six individuals with spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy (GMFCS and MACS IV and V) was evaluated. Method: A customised, gamified training paradigm was employed. Over three weeks, the participants spent two sessions exploring the system, and up to six sessions playing the game which focussed on EEG feedback of left and right arm motor imagery. Results: The participants showed variable inconclusive results in the ability to produce two distinct EEG patterns. Participant performance was influenced by physical illness, motivation, fatigue and concentration. Conclusions: The results from this case study highlight the infancy of BCIs as a form of assistive technology for people with cerebral palsy. Existing commercial BCIs are not designed according to the needs of end-users. Implications for Rehabilitation Mood, fatigue, physical illness and motivation influence the usability of a brain–computer interface. Commercial brain–computer interfaces are not designed for practical assistive technology use for people with cerebral palsy. Practical brain–computer interface assistive technologies may need to be flexible to suit individual needs.

[1]  J. Ziviani,et al.  Barriers to the use of assistive technology for children with multiple disabilities. , 2004, Occupational therapy international.

[2]  Norma J. Stumbo,et al.  Assistive technology: Impact on education, employment, and independence of individuals with physical disabilities , 2009 .

[3]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  EEG-based discrimination between imagination of right and left hand movement. , 1997, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[4]  Karla Felix Navarro,et al.  A Comprehensive Survey of Brain Interface Technology Designs , 2007, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[5]  Heidi Silver-Pacuilla,et al.  The State of Assistive Technology: Themes from an Outcomes Summit , 2006 .

[6]  Ian Daly,et al.  On the control of brain-computer interfaces by users with cerebral palsy , 2013, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[7]  Moritz Grosse-Wentrup,et al.  Critical issues in state-of-the-art brain–computer interface signal processing , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[8]  Jane E Huggins,et al.  Barriers to and mediators of brain–computer interface user acceptance: focus group findings , 2012, Ergonomics.

[9]  David Ewins,et al.  The Emotiv EPOC neuroheadset: an inexpensive method of controlling assistive technologies using facial expressions and thoughts? , 2011 .

[10]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  How Many People Could Use an SSVEP BCI? , 2012, Front. Neurosci..

[11]  Rajesh P. N. Rao,et al.  Distributed cortical adaptation during learning of a brain–computer interface task , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  Could Anyone Use a BCI? , 2010, Brain-Computer Interfaces.

[13]  Reinhold Scherer,et al.  Thought-based row-column scanning communication board for individuals with cerebral palsy. , 2015, Annals of physical and rehabilitation medicine.

[14]  Marti L. Riemer-Reiss,et al.  Factors Associated with Assistive Technology Discontinuance among Individuals with Disabilities , 2000 .

[15]  Tobias Kaufmann,et al.  User Centred Design in BCI Development , 2012 .

[16]  Helene Lidström,et al.  Use of assistive technology devices in mainstream schools: students' perspective. , 2009, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[17]  G. R. Muller,et al.  Clinical application of an EEG-based brain–computer interface: a case study in a patient with severe motor impairment , 2003, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[18]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  The Influence of Psychological State and Motivation on Brain–Computer Interface Performance in Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis – a Longitudinal Study , 2010, Front. Neuropharma..

[19]  Michitaka Hirose,et al.  Brain-Computer Interfaces, Virtual Reality, and Videogames , 2008, Computer.

[20]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Neurophysiological predictor of SMR-based BCI performance , 2010, NeuroImage.

[21]  T. C. Davies,et al.  Training to use a commercial brain-computer interface as access technology: a case study , 2014, Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology.

[22]  Toshiyuki Kondo,et al.  Effect of instructive visual stimuli on neurofeedback training for motor imagery-based brain-computer interface. , 2015, Human movement science.