A BMI-based occupational therapy assist suit: asynchronous control by SSVEP

A brain-machine interface (BMI) is an interface technology that uses neurophysiological signals from the brain to control external machines. Recent invasive BMI technologies have succeeded in the asynchronous control of robot arms for a useful series of actions, such as reaching and grasping. In this study, we developed non-invasive BMI technologies aiming to make such useful movements using the subject's own hands by preparing a BMI-based occupational therapy assist suit (BOTAS). We prepared a pre-recorded series of useful actions—a grasping-a-ball movement and a carrying-the-ball movement—and added asynchronous control using steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP) signals. A SSVEP signal was used to trigger the grasping-a-ball movement and another SSVEP signal was used to trigger the carrying-the-ball movement. A support vector machine was used to classify EEG signals recorded from the visual cortex (Oz) in real time. Untrained, able-bodied participants (n = 12) operated the system successfully. Classification accuracy and time required for SSVEP detection were ~88% and 3 s, respectively. We further recruited three patients with upper cervical spinal cord injuries (SCIs); they also succeeded in operating the system without training. These data suggest that our BOTAS system is potentially useful in terms of rehabilitation of patients with upper limb disabilities.

[1]  N. L. Johnson,et al.  Multivariate Analysis , 1958, Nature.

[2]  P. London Injury , 1969, Definitions.

[3]  T. Flash,et al.  The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model , 1985, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[4]  E. Donchin,et al.  Talking off the top of your head: toward a mental prosthesis utilizing event-related brain potentials. , 1988, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[5]  宇野 洋二,et al.  Formation and control of optimal trajectory in human multijoint arm movement : minimum torque-change model , 1988 .

[6]  D. Regan Human brain electrophysiology: Evoked potentials and evoked magnetic fields in science and medicine , 1989 .

[7]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[8]  Xiaorong Gao,et al.  Design and implementation of a brain-computer interface with high transfer rates , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  Hui-ing Ma,et al.  A synthesis of the effects of occupational therapy for persons with stroke, Part II: Remediation of impairments. , 2002, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[10]  J. Masdeu,et al.  Human Cerebral Activation during Steady-State Visual-Evoked Responses , 2003, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  Hermano Igo Krebs,et al.  Rehabilitation Robotics: Performance-Based Progressive Robot-Assisted Therapy , 2003, Auton. Robots.

[12]  M. Kawato,et al.  Formation and control of optimal trajectory in human multijoint arm movement , 1989, Biological Cybernetics.

[13]  N. Hogan,et al.  Customized interactive robotic treatment for stroke: EMG-triggered therapy , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[14]  Margaret A. Finley,et al.  Short-duration robotic therapy in stroke patients with severe upper-limb motor impairment. , 2005, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[15]  Bo Hong,et al.  A practical VEP-based brain-computer interface , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[16]  L.J. Trejo,et al.  Brain-computer interfaces for 1-D and 2-D cursor control: designs using volitional control of the EEG spectrum or steady-state visual evoked potentials , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[17]  W. Harwin,et al.  Multivariate analysis of the Fugl-Meyer outcome measures assessing the effectiveness of GENTLE/S robot-mediated stroke therapy , 2007, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[18]  D.J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Automating Arm Movement Training Following Severe Stroke: Functional Exercises With Quantitative Feedback in a Gravity-Reduced Environment , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[19]  Miguel A. L. Nicolelis,et al.  Brain–machine interfaces: past, present and future , 2006, Trends in Neurosciences.

[20]  L. Cohen,et al.  Brain–computer interfaces: communication and restoration of movement in paralysis , 2007, The Journal of physiology.

[21]  H.I. Krebs,et al.  Robot-Aided Neurorehabilitation: A Robot for Wrist Rehabilitation , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[22]  J. Mehrholz,et al.  Robot-assisted upper and lower limb rehabilitation after stroke: walking and arm/hand function. , 2008, Deutsches Arzteblatt international.

[23]  Le Li,et al.  Assistive Control System Using Continuous Myoelectric Signal in Robot-Aided Arm Training for Patients After Stroke , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[24]  D.J. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Optimizing Compliant, Model-Based Robotic Assistance to Promote Neurorehabilitation , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[25]  Gernot R. Müller-Putz,et al.  Control of an Electrical Prosthesis With an SSVEP-Based BCI , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[26]  Bo Hong,et al.  The SSVEP topographic scalp maps by Canonical correlation analysis , 2008, 2008 30th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[27]  D. Reinkensmeyer,et al.  Review of control strategies for robotic movement training after neurologic injury , 2009, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[28]  M. G. Maioli,et al.  Evaluation of an occupational therapy program for patients with spinal cord injury , 2008, Spinal Cord.

[29]  R. Riener,et al.  Effects of intensive arm training with the rehabilitation robot ARMin II in chronic stroke patients: four single-cases , 2009, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[30]  Xiaorong Gao,et al.  An online multi-channel SSVEP-based brain–computer interface using a canonical correlation analysis method , 2009, Journal of neural engineering.

[31]  L. Lucca,et al.  Robot-assisted rehabilitation of the paretic upper limb: rationale of the ARAMIS project. , 2009, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[32]  Stephen J. Ball,et al.  Performance Evaluation of a Planar 3DOF Robotic Exoskeleton for Motor Assessment , 2009 .

[33]  Loris Pignolo,et al.  Robotics in neuro-rehabilitation. , 2009, Journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[34]  Y. Nakajima,et al.  Visual stimuli for the P300 brain–computer interface: A comparison of white/gray and green/blue flicker matrices , 2009, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[35]  Hadi Aliakbarpour,et al.  Multiclass brain computer interface based on visual attention , 2009, ESANN.

[36]  Rahsaan J. Holley,et al.  Development and pilot testing of HEXORR: Hand EXOskeleton Rehabilitation Robot , 2010, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[37]  Wanderley Cardoso Celeste,et al.  Brain-computer Interface Based on Visual Evoked Potentials to Command Autonomous Robotic Wheelchair , 2010 .

[38]  Ronald M. Aarts,et al.  A Survey of Stimulation Methods Used in SSVEP-Based BCIs , 2010, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[39]  Ying Sun,et al.  Asynchronous P300 BCI: SSVEP-based control state detection , 2010, 2010 18th European Signal Processing Conference.

[40]  G Pfurtscheller,et al.  Toward a hybrid brain–computer interface based on imagined movement and visual attention , 2010, Journal of neural engineering.

[41]  T. J. Sullivan,et al.  A user-friendly SSVEP-based brain–computer interface using a time-domain classifier , 2010, Journal of neural engineering.

[42]  A. Cichocki,et al.  Optimization of SSVEP brain responses with application to eight-command Brain–Computer Interface , 2010, Neuroscience Letters.

[43]  Christa Neuper,et al.  Asynchronous steady-state visual evoked potential based BCI control of a 2-DoF artificial upper limb , 2010, Biomedizinische Technik. Biomedical engineering.

[44]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  Self-Paced Operation of an SSVEP-Based Orthosis With and Without an Imagery-Based “Brain Switch:” A Feasibility Study Towards a Hybrid BCI , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[45]  Brendan Z. Allison,et al.  The Hybrid BCI , 2010, Frontiers in Neuroscience.

[46]  Ramaswamy Palaniappan,et al.  Analogue mouse pointer control via an online steady state visual evoked potential (SSVEP) brain-computer interface. , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[47]  Teodiano Freire Bastos Filho,et al.  Robotic wheelchair commanded by SSVEP, motor imagery and word generation , 2011, 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[48]  Christa Neuper,et al.  Combined motor imagery and SSVEP based BCI control of a 2 DoF artificial upper limb , 2011, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing.

[49]  Ivan Volosyak,et al.  SSVEP-based Bremen–BCI interface—boosting information transfer rates , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[50]  J. Peters,et al.  Closing the sensorimotor loop: haptic feedback facilitates decoding of motor imagery , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[51]  G. Pfurtscheller,et al.  An SSVEP BCI to Control a Hand Orthosis for Persons With Tetraplegia , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[52]  Pablo F. Diez,et al.  Asynchronous BCI control using high-frequency SSVEP , 2011, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[53]  Kenji Kansaku,et al.  Brain-Machine Interfaces for Persons with Disabilities , 2011 .

[54]  Dennis J. McFarland,et al.  Brain–computer interfaces for communication and control , 2002, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[55]  S. Masiero,et al.  Upper-limb robot-assisted therapy in rehabilitation of acute stroke patients: focused review and results of new randomized controlled trial. , 2011, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[56]  K. Kansaku,et al.  Operation of a P300-based brain–computer interface by individuals with cervical spinal cord injury , 2011, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[57]  Donatella Mattia,et al.  A Brain-Computer Interface as Input Channel for a Standard Assistive Technology Software , 2011, Clinical EEG and neuroscience.

[58]  C. Neuper,et al.  Sensorimotor rhythm-based brain–computer interface training: the impact on motor cortical responsiveness , 2011, Journal of neural engineering.

[59]  Naoki Hata,et al.  Towards Intelligent Environments: An Augmented Reality–Brain–Machine Interface Operated with a See-Through Head-Mount Display , 2011, Front. Neurosci..

[60]  Nicolas Y. Masse,et al.  Reach and grasp by people with tetraplegia using a neurally controlled robotic arm , 2012, Nature.

[61]  A. Schwartz,et al.  High-performance neuroprosthetic control by an individual with tetraplegia , 2013, The Lancet.

[62]  L. Cohen,et al.  Brain–machine interface in chronic stroke rehabilitation: A controlled study , 2013, Annals of neurology.