Cargando…

A comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements

Myoelectric control has been used for decades to control powered upper limb prostheses. Conventional, amplitude-based control has been employed to control a single prosthesis degree of freedom (DOF) such as closing and opening of the hand. Within the last decade, new and advanced arm and hand prosth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Young, Aaron J, Smith, Lauren H, Rouse, Elliott J, Hargrove, Levi J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3895741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24410948
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-5
_version_ 1782300004421992448
author Young, Aaron J
Smith, Lauren H
Rouse, Elliott J
Hargrove, Levi J
author_facet Young, Aaron J
Smith, Lauren H
Rouse, Elliott J
Hargrove, Levi J
author_sort Young, Aaron J
collection PubMed
description Myoelectric control has been used for decades to control powered upper limb prostheses. Conventional, amplitude-based control has been employed to control a single prosthesis degree of freedom (DOF) such as closing and opening of the hand. Within the last decade, new and advanced arm and hand prostheses have been constructed that are capable of actuating numerous DOFs. Pattern recognition control has been proposed to control a greater number of DOFs than conventional control, but has traditionally been limited to sequentially controlling DOFs one at a time. However, able-bodied individuals use multiple DOFs simultaneously, and it may be beneficial to provide amputees the ability to perform simultaneous movements. In this study, four amputees who had undergone targeted motor reinnervation (TMR) surgery with previous training using myoelectric prostheses were configured to use three control strategies: 1) conventional amplitude-based myoelectric control, 2) sequential (one-DOF) pattern recognition control, 3) simultaneous pattern recognition control. Simultaneous pattern recognition was enabled by having amputees train each simultaneous movement as a separate motion class. For tasks that required control over just one DOF, sequential pattern recognition based control performed the best with the lowest average completion times, completion rates and length error. For tasks that required control over 2 DOFs, the simultaneous pattern recognition controller performed the best with the lowest average completion times, completion rates and length error compared to the other control strategies. In the two strategies in which users could employ simultaneous movements (conventional and simultaneous pattern recognition), amputees chose to use simultaneous movements 78% of the time with simultaneous pattern recognition and 64% of the time with conventional control for tasks that required two DOF motions to reach the target. These results suggest that when amputees are given the ability to control multiple DOFs simultaneously, they choose to perform tasks that utilize multiple DOFs with simultaneous movements. Additionally, they were able to perform these tasks with higher performance (faster speed, lower length error and higher completion rates) without losing substantial performance in 1 DOF tasks.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3895741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38957412014-01-21 A comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements Young, Aaron J Smith, Lauren H Rouse, Elliott J Hargrove, Levi J J Neuroeng Rehabil Research Myoelectric control has been used for decades to control powered upper limb prostheses. Conventional, amplitude-based control has been employed to control a single prosthesis degree of freedom (DOF) such as closing and opening of the hand. Within the last decade, new and advanced arm and hand prostheses have been constructed that are capable of actuating numerous DOFs. Pattern recognition control has been proposed to control a greater number of DOFs than conventional control, but has traditionally been limited to sequentially controlling DOFs one at a time. However, able-bodied individuals use multiple DOFs simultaneously, and it may be beneficial to provide amputees the ability to perform simultaneous movements. In this study, four amputees who had undergone targeted motor reinnervation (TMR) surgery with previous training using myoelectric prostheses were configured to use three control strategies: 1) conventional amplitude-based myoelectric control, 2) sequential (one-DOF) pattern recognition control, 3) simultaneous pattern recognition control. Simultaneous pattern recognition was enabled by having amputees train each simultaneous movement as a separate motion class. For tasks that required control over just one DOF, sequential pattern recognition based control performed the best with the lowest average completion times, completion rates and length error. For tasks that required control over 2 DOFs, the simultaneous pattern recognition controller performed the best with the lowest average completion times, completion rates and length error compared to the other control strategies. In the two strategies in which users could employ simultaneous movements (conventional and simultaneous pattern recognition), amputees chose to use simultaneous movements 78% of the time with simultaneous pattern recognition and 64% of the time with conventional control for tasks that required two DOF motions to reach the target. These results suggest that when amputees are given the ability to control multiple DOFs simultaneously, they choose to perform tasks that utilize multiple DOFs with simultaneous movements. Additionally, they were able to perform these tasks with higher performance (faster speed, lower length error and higher completion rates) without losing substantial performance in 1 DOF tasks. BioMed Central 2014-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3895741/ /pubmed/24410948 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-5 Text en Copyright © 2014 Young et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Young, Aaron J
Smith, Lauren H
Rouse, Elliott J
Hargrove, Levi J
A comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements
title A comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements
title_full A comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements
title_fullStr A comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements
title_short A comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements
title_sort comparison of the real-time controllability of pattern recognition to conventional myoelectric control for discrete and simultaneous movements
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3895741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24410948
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-11-5
work_keys_str_mv AT youngaaronj acomparisonoftherealtimecontrollabilityofpatternrecognitiontoconventionalmyoelectriccontrolfordiscreteandsimultaneousmovements
AT smithlaurenh acomparisonoftherealtimecontrollabilityofpatternrecognitiontoconventionalmyoelectriccontrolfordiscreteandsimultaneousmovements
AT rouseelliottj acomparisonoftherealtimecontrollabilityofpatternrecognitiontoconventionalmyoelectriccontrolfordiscreteandsimultaneousmovements
AT hargrovelevij acomparisonoftherealtimecontrollabilityofpatternrecognitiontoconventionalmyoelectriccontrolfordiscreteandsimultaneousmovements
AT youngaaronj comparisonoftherealtimecontrollabilityofpatternrecognitiontoconventionalmyoelectriccontrolfordiscreteandsimultaneousmovements
AT smithlaurenh comparisonoftherealtimecontrollabilityofpatternrecognitiontoconventionalmyoelectriccontrolfordiscreteandsimultaneousmovements
AT rouseelliottj comparisonoftherealtimecontrollabilityofpatternrecognitiontoconventionalmyoelectriccontrolfordiscreteandsimultaneousmovements
AT hargrovelevij comparisonoftherealtimecontrollabilityofpatternrecognitiontoconventionalmyoelectriccontrolfordiscreteandsimultaneousmovements