Search

Closing the prosthesis control loop by providing artificial somatosensory feedback can improve utility and user experience. Additionally, closed-loop control should be more robust with respect to disturbance, but this might depend on the type of feedback provided. Thus, the present study investigates and compares the performance of EMG and force feedback in the presence of control disturbances. Twenty able-bodied subjects and one transradial amputee performed delicate and power grasps with a prosthesis in a functional task, while the control signal gain was temporarily increased (high-gain disturbance) or decreased (low-gain disturbance) without their knowledge. Three outcome measures were considered: the percentage of trials successful in the first attempt (reaction to disturbance), the average number of attempts in trials where the wrong force was initially applied (adaptation to disturbance), and the average completion time of the last attempt in every trial. EMG feedback was shown to offer significantly better performance compared to force feedback during power grasping in terms of reaction to disturbance and completion time. During power grasping with high-gain disturbance, the median first-attempt success rate was significantly higher with EMG feedback (73.3%) compared to that achieved with force feedback (60%). Moreover, the median completion time for power grasps with low-gain disturbance was significantly longer with force feedback than with EMG feedback (3.64 against 2.48 s, an increase of 32%). Contrary to our expectations, there was no significant difference between feedback types with regards to adaptation to disturbances and the two feedback types performed similarly in delicate grasps. The results indicated that EMG feedback displayed better performance than force feedback in the presence of control disturbances, further demonstrating the potential of this approach to provide a reliable prosthesis-user interaction., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Tchimino, Dideriksen and Dosen.)

Modern myoelectric prostheses can perform multiple functions (e.g., several grasp types and wrist rotation) but their intuitive control by the user is still an open challenge. It has been recently demonstrated that semi-autonomous control can allow the subjects to operate complex prostheses effectively; however, this approach often requires placing sensors on the user. The present study proposes a system for semi-autonomous control of a myoelectric prosthesis that requires a single depth sensor placed on the dorsal side of the hand. The system automatically pre-shapes the hand (grasp type, size, and wrist rotation) and allows the user to grasp objects of different shapes, sizes and orientations, placed individually or within cluttered scenes. The system "reacts" to the side from which the object is approached, and enables the user to target not only the whole object but also an object part. Another unique aspect of the system is that it relies on online interaction between the user and the prosthesis; the system reacts continuously on the targets that are in its focus, while the user interprets the movement of the prosthesis to adjust aiming. Experimental assessment was conducted in ten able-bodied participants to evaluate the feasibility and the impact of training on prosthesis-user interaction. The subjects used the system to grasp a set of objects individually (Phase I) and in cluttered scenarios (Phase II), while the time to accomplish the task (TAT) was used as the performance metric. In both phases, the TAT improved significantly across blocks. Some targets (objects and/or their parts) were more challenging, requiring thus significantly more time to handle, but all objects and scenes were successfully accomplished by all subjects. The assessment therefore demonstrated that the system is indeed robust and effective, and that the subjects could successfully learn how to aim with the system after a brief training. This is an important step toward the development of a self-contained semi-autonomous system convenient for clinical applications., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Castro and Dosen.)

Semi-autonomous (SA) control of upper-limb prostheses can improve the performance and decrease the cognitive burden of a user. In this approach, a prosthesis is equipped with additional sensors (e.g., computer vision) that provide contextual information and enable the system to accomplish some tasks automatically. Autonomous control is fused with a volitional input of a user to compute the commands that are sent to the prosthesis. Although several promising prototypes demonstrating the potential of this approach have been presented, methods to integrate the two control streams (i.e., autonomous and volitional) have not been systematically investigated. In the present study, we implemented three shared control modalities (i.e., sequential, simultaneous , and continuous ) and compared their performance, as well as the cognitive and physical burdens imposed on the user. In the sequential approach, the volitional input disabled the autonomous control. In the simultaneous approach, the volitional input to a specific degree of freedom (DoF) activated autonomous control of other DoFs, whereas in the continuous approach, autonomous control was always active except for the DoFs controlled by the user. The experiment was conducted in ten able-bodied subjects, and these subjects used an SA prosthesis to perform reach-and-grasp tasks while reacting to audio cues (dual tasking). The results demonstrated that, compared to the manual baseline (volitional control only), all three SA modalities accomplished the task in a shorter time and resulted in less volitional control input. The simultaneous SA modality performed worse than the sequential and continuous SA approaches. When systematic errors were introduced in the autonomous controller to generate a mismatch between the goals of the user and controller, the performance of SA modalities substantially decreased, even below the manual baseline. The sequential SA scheme was the least impacted one in terms of errors. The present study demonstrates that a specific approach for integrating volitional and autonomous control is indeed an important factor that significantly affects the performance and physical and cognitive load, and therefore these should be considered when designing SA prostheses., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Mouchoux, Bravo-Cabrera, Dosen, Schilling and Markovic.)

Aim: Limb loss is a dramatic event with a devastating impact on a person's quality of life. Prostheses have been used to restore lost motor abilities and cosmetic appearance. Closing the loop between the prosthesis and the amputee by providing somatosensory feedback to the user might improve the performance, confidence of the amputee, and embodiment of the prosthesis. Recently, a minimally invasive method, in which the electrodes are placed subdermally, was presented and psychometrically evaluated. The present study aimed to assess the quality of online control with subdermal stimulation and compare it to that achieved using surface stimulation (common benchmark) as well as to investigate the impact of training on the two modalities., Methods: Ten able-bodied subjects performed a PC-based compensatory tracking task. The subjects employed a joystick to track a predefined pseudorandom trajectory using feedback on the momentary tracking error, which was conveyed via surface and subdermal electrotactile stimulation. The tracking performance was evaluated using the correlation coefficient (CORR), root mean square error (RMSE), and time delay between reference and generated trajectories., Results: Both stimulation modalities resulted in good closed-loop control, and surface stimulation outperformed the subdermal approach. There was significant difference in CORR (86 vs 77%) and RMSE (0.23 vs 0.31) between surface and subdermal stimulation (all p < 0.05). The RMSE of the subdermal stimulation decreased significantly in the first few trials., Conclusion: Subdermal stimulation is a viable method to provide tactile feedback. The quality of online control is, however, somewhat worse compared to that achieved using surface stimulation. Nevertheless, due to minimal invasiveness, compactness, and power efficiency, the subdermal interface could be an attractive solution for the functional application in sensate prostheses., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Dong, Jensen, Geng, Kamavuako and Dosen.)

This manuscript reviews historical and recent studies that focus on supplementary sensory feedback for use in upper limb prostheses. It shows that the inability of many studies to speak to the issue of meaningful performance improvements in real-life scenarios is caused by the complexity of the interactions of supplementary sensory feedback with other types of feedback along with other portions of the motor control process. To do this, the present manuscript frames the question of supplementary feedback from the perspective of computational motor control, providing a brief review of the main advances in that field over the last 20 years. It then separates the studies on the closed-loop prosthesis control into distinct categories, which are defined by relating the impact of feedback to the relevant components of the motor control framework, and reviews the work that has been done over the last 50+ years in each of those categories. It ends with a discussion of the studies, along with suggestions for experimental construction and connections with other areas of research, such as machine learning., (Copyright © 2020 Sensinger and Dosen.)

The feeling of embodiment, i.e., experiencing the body as belonging to oneself and being able to integrate objects into one's bodily self-representation, is a key aspect of human self-consciousness and has been shown to importantly shape human cognition. An extension of such feelings toward robots has been argued as being crucial for assistive technologies aiming at restoring, extending, or simulating sensorimotor functions. Empirical and theoretical work illustrates the importance of sensory feedback for the feeling of embodiment and also immersion; we focus on the the perceptual level of touch and the role of tactile feedback in various assistive robotic devices. We critically review how different facets of tactile perception in humans, i.e., affective, social, and self-touch, might influence embodiment. This is particularly important as current assistive robotic devices - such as prostheses, orthoses, exoskeletons, and devices for teleoperation-often limit touch low-density and spatially constrained haptic feedback, i.e., the mere touch sensation linked to an action. Here, we analyze, discuss, and propose how and to what degree tactile feedback might increase the embodiment of certain robotic devices, e.g., prostheses, and the feeling of immersion in human-robot interaction, e.g., in teleoperation. Based on recent findings from cognitive psychology on interactive processes between touch and embodiment, we discuss technical solutions for specific applications, which might be used to enhance embodiment, and facilitate the study of how embodiment might alter human-robot interactions. We postulate that high-density and large surface sensing and stimulation are required to foster embodiment of such assistive devices.

Pathological tremors are involuntary oscillatory movements which cannot be fully attenuated using conventional treatments. For this reason, several studies have investigated the use of neuromuscular electrical stimulation for tremor suppression. In a recent study, however, we found that electrical stimulation below the motor threshold also suppressed tremor, indicating involvement of afferent pathways. In this study, we further explored this possibility by systematically investigating how tremor suppression by afferent stimulation depends on the stimulation settings. In this way, we aimed at identifying the optimal stimulation strategy, as well as to elucidate the underlying physiological mechanisms of tremor suppression. Stimulation strategies varying the stimulation intensity and pulse timing were tested in nine tremor patients using either intramuscular or surface stimulation. Significant tremor suppression was observed in six patients (tremor suppression > 75% was observed in three patients) and the average optimal suppression level observed across all subjects was 52%. The efficiency for each stimulation setting, however, varied substantially across patients and it was not possible to identify a single set of stimulation parameters that yielded positive results in all patients. For example, tremor suppression was achieved both with stimulation delivered in an out-of-phase pattern with respect to the tremor, and with random timing of the stimulation. Overall, these results indicate that low-current stimulation of afferent fibers is a promising approach for tremor suppression, but that further research is required to identify how the effect can be maximized in the individual patient.

Humans can efficiently walk across a large variety of terrains and locomotion conditions with little or no mental effort. It has been hypothesized that the nervous system simplifies neuromuscular control by using muscle synergies, thus organizing multi-muscle activity into a small number of coordinative co-activation modules. In the present study we investigated how muscle modularity is structured across a large repertoire of locomotion conditions including five different speeds and five different ground elevations. For this we have used the non-negative matrix factorization technique in order to explain EMG experimental data with a low-dimensional set of four motor components. In this context each motor components is composed of a non-negative factor and the associated muscle weightings. Furthermore, we have investigated if the proposed descriptive analysis of muscle modularity could be translated into a predictive model that could: (1) Estimate how motor components modulate across locomotion speeds and ground elevations. This implies not only estimating the non-negative factors temporal characteristics, but also the associated muscle weighting variations. (2) Estimate how the resulting muscle excitations modulate across novel locomotion conditions and subjects. The results showed three major distinctive features of muscle modularity: (1) the number of motor components was preserved across all locomotion conditions, (2) the non-negative factors were consistent in shape and timing across all locomotion conditions, and (3) the muscle weightings were modulated as distinctive functions of locomotion speed and ground elevation. Results also showed that the developed predictive model was able to reproduce well the muscle modularity of un-modeled data, i.e., novel subjects and conditions. Muscle weightings were reconstructed with a cross-correlation factor greater than 70% and a root mean square error less than 0.10. Furthermore, the generated muscle excitations matched well the experimental excitation with a cross-correlation factor greater than 85% and a root mean square error less than 0.09. The ability of synthetizing the neuromuscular mechanisms underlying human locomotion across a variety of locomotion conditions will enable solutions in the field of neurorehabilitation technologies and control of bipedal artificial systems. Open-access of the model implementation is provided for further analysis at https://simtk.org/home/p-mep/.

One of the hottest topics in rehabilitation robotics is that of proper control of prosthetic devices. Despite decades of research, the state of the art is dramatically behind the expectations. To shed light on this issue, in June, 2013 the first international workshop on Present and future of non-invasive peripheral nervous system (PNS)-Machine Interfaces (MI; PMI) was convened, hosted by the International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics. The keyword PMI has been selected to denote human-machine interfaces targeted at the limb-deficient, mainly upper-limb amputees, dealing with signals gathered from the PNS in a non-invasive way, that is, from the surface of the residuum. The workshop was intended to provide an overview of the state of the art and future perspectives of such interfaces; this paper represents is a collection of opinions expressed by each and every researcher/group involved in it.