Cargando…

Functional-oriented, portable brain–computer interface training for hand motor recovery after stroke: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND: Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) have been proven to be effective for hand motor recovery after stroke. Facing kinds of dysfunction of the paretic hand, the motor task of BCIs for hand rehabilitation is relatively single, and the operation of many BCI devices is complex for clinical use....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fu, Jianghong, Chen, Shugeng, Shu, Xiaokang, Lin, Yifang, Jiang, Zewu, Wei, Dongshuai, Gao, Jiajia, Jia, Jie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10213744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37250399
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1146146
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) have been proven to be effective for hand motor recovery after stroke. Facing kinds of dysfunction of the paretic hand, the motor task of BCIs for hand rehabilitation is relatively single, and the operation of many BCI devices is complex for clinical use. Therefore, we proposed a functional-oriented, portable BCI equipment and explored the efficiency of hand motor recovery after a stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stroke patients were randomly assigned to the BCI group and the control group. The BCI group received BCI-based grasp/open motor training, while the control group received task-oriented guidance training. Both groups received 20 sessions of motor training in 4 weeks, and each session lasted for 30 min. The Fugl–Meyer assessment of the upper limb (FMA-UE) was applied for the assessment of rehabilitation outcomes, and the EEG signals were obtained for processing. RESULTS: The progress of FMA-UE between the BCI group [10.50 (5.75, 16.50)] and the control group [5.00 (4.00, 8.00)] was significantly different (Z = −2.834, P = 0.005). Meanwhile, the FMA-UE of both groups improved significantly (P < 0.001). A total of 24 patients in the BCI group achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of FMA-UE with an effective rate of 80%, and 16 in the control group achieved the MCID, with an effective rate of 51.6%. The lateral index of the open task in the BCI group was significantly decreased (Z = −2.704, P = 0.007). The average BCI accuracy for 24 stroke patients in 20 sessions was 70.7%, which was improved by 5.0% in the final session compared with the first session. CONCLUSION: Targeted hand movement and two motor task modes, namely grasp and open, to be applied in a BCI design may be suitable in stroke patients with hand dysfunction. The functional-oriented, portable BCI training can promote hand recovery after a stroke, and it is expected to be widely used in clinical practice. The lateral index change of inter-hemispheric balance may be the mechanism of motor recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2100044492.