High Amplitude EEG Motor Potential during Repetitive Foot Movement: Possible Use and Challenges for Futuristic BCIs That Restore Mobility after Spinal Cord Injury
Aljoscha Thomschewski, Yvonne Höller, Peter Höller, Stefan Leis, Eugen Trinka
Abstract
Recent advances in neuroprostheses provide us with promising ideas of how to improve the quality of life in people suffering from impaired motor functioning of upper and lower limbs. Especially for patients after spinal cord injury (SCI), futuristic devices that are controlled by thought via brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) might be of tremendous help in managing daily tasks and restoring at least some mobility. However, there are certain problems arising when trying to implement BCI technology especially in such a heterogenous patient group. A plethora of processes occurring after the injuries change the brain's structure as well as its functionality collectively referred to as neuroplasticity. These changes are very different between individuals, leading to an increasing interest to reveal the exact changes occurring after SCI. In this study we investigated event-related potentials (ERPs) derived from electroencephalography (EEG) signals recorded during the (attempted) execution and imagination of hand and foot movements in healthy subjects and patients with SCI. As ERPs and especially early components are of interest for BCI research we aimed to investigate differences between 22 healthy volunteers and 7 patients (mean age = 51.86, SD = 15.49) suffering from traumatic or non-traumatic SCI since 2-314 months (mean = 116,57, SD = 125,55). We aimed to explore differences in ERP responses as well as the general presence of component that might be of interest to further consider for incorporation into BCI research. In order to match the real-life situation of BCIs for controlling neuroprostheses, we worked on small trial numbers (<25), only. We obtained a focal potential over Pz in ten healthy participants but in none of the patients after lenient artifact rejection. The potential was characterized by a high amplitude, it correlated with the repeated movements (6 times in 6 s) and in nine subjects it significantly differed from a resting condition. Furthermore, there are strong arguments against possible confounding factors leading to the potential's appearance. This phenomenon, occurring when movements are repeatedly conducted, might represent a possible potential to be used in futuristic BCIs and further studies should try to investigate the replicability of its appearance.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 October 2017.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,070
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,382
of 329,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#147
of 194 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 194 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
