Abstract

Background: Motor attempt and motor imagery (MI) are two common motor tasks used in brain-computer interface (BCI). They are widely researched for motor rehabilitation in patients with hemiplegia. The differences between the motor attempt (MA) and MI tasks of patients with hemiplegia can be used to promote BCI application. This study aimed to explore the accuracy of BCI and event-related desynchronization (ERD) between the two tasks.Materials and Methods: We recruited 13 patients with stroke and 3 patients with traumatic brain injury, to perform MA and MI tasks in a self-control design. The BCI accuracies from the bilateral, ipsilesional, and contralesional hemispheres were analyzed and compared between different tasks. The cortical activation patterns were evaluated with ERD and laterality index (LI).Results: The study showed that the BCI accuracies of MA were significantly (p < 0.05) higher than MI in the bilateral, ipsilesional, and contralesional hemispheres in the alpha-beta (8–30 Hz) frequency bands. There was no significant difference in ERD and LI between the MA and MI tasks in the 8–30 Hz frequency bands. However, in the MA task, there was a negative correlation between the ERD values in the channel CP1 and ipsilesional hemispheric BCI accuracies (r = −0.552, p = 0.041, n = 14) and a negative correlation between the ERD values in channel CP2 and bilateral hemispheric BCI accuracies (r = −0.543, p = 0.045, n = 14). While in the MI task, there were negative correlations between the ERD values in channel C4 and bilateral hemispheric BCI accuracies (r = −0.582, p = 0.029, n = 14) as well as the contralesional hemispheric BCI accuracies (r = −0.657, p = 0.011, n = 14). As for motor dysfunction, there was a significant positive correlation between the ipsilesional BCI accuracies and FMA scores of the hand part in 8–13 Hz (r = 0.565, p = 0.035, n = 14) in the MA task and a significant positive correlation between the ipsilesional BCI accuracies and FMA scores of the hand part in 13–30 Hz (r = 0.558, p = 0.038, n = 14) in the MI task.Conclusion: The MA task may achieve better BCI accuracy but have similar cortical activations with the MI task. Cortical activation (ERD) may influence the BCI accuracy, which should be carefully considered in the BCI motor rehabilitation of patients with hemiplegia.

Highlights

  • Motor attempt and motor imagery (MI) are two common experimental paradigms in the non-invasive electroencephalogram (EEG)-based brain-computer interface (BCI) system design

  • Given the lack of studies investigating BCI accuracy and the EEG features between motor attempt (MA) and MI tasks in patients with hemiplegia, we aim to explore the cortical difference between MA and MI tasks

  • The main effect analysis from the two-way repeated-measures ANOVA on the BCI accuracies showed that the tasks had a significant effect on BCI accuracies (F1,13 = 13.293, p = 0.003) while there was no significant effect for the hemispheres on BCI accuracies (F2,26 = 1.49, p = 0.244)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Motor attempt and motor imagery (MI) are two common experimental paradigms in the non-invasive electroencephalogram (EEG)-based brain-computer interface (BCI) system design. A study (HotzBoendermaker et al, 2008) of neural activity using functional MRI (fMRI) in paraplegics showed that during the attempt to move, the primary motor cortex is slightly less engaged than during the imagination of movement, the regions of the parietal lobe and cerebellum, well known to be involved in sensorimotor integration, are more activated during the attempt to move. Motor attempt and motor imagery (MI) are two common motor tasks used in brain-computer interface (BCI). They are widely researched for motor rehabilitation in patients with hemiplegia. The differences between the motor attempt (MA) and MI tasks of patients with hemiplegia can be used to promote BCI application. This study aimed to explore the accuracy of BCI and event-related desynchronization (ERD) between the two tasks

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call