Cargando…
Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback
A non-optimal prosthesis integration into an amputee’s body schema suggests some important functional and health consequences after lower limb amputation. These include low perception of a prosthesis as a part of the body, experiencing it as heavier than the natural limb, and cognitively exhausting...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9537330/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36202893 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21057-y |
_version_ | 1784803177697116160 |
---|---|
author | Chee, Lauren Valle, Giacomo Preatoni, Greta Basla, Chiara Marazzi, Michele Raspopovic, Stanisa |
author_facet | Chee, Lauren Valle, Giacomo Preatoni, Greta Basla, Chiara Marazzi, Michele Raspopovic, Stanisa |
author_sort | Chee, Lauren |
collection | PubMed |
description | A non-optimal prosthesis integration into an amputee’s body schema suggests some important functional and health consequences after lower limb amputation. These include low perception of a prosthesis as a part of the body, experiencing it as heavier than the natural limb, and cognitively exhausting use for users. Invasive approaches, exploiting the surgical implantation of electrodes in residual nerves, improved prosthesis integration by restoring natural and somatotopic sensory feedback in transfemoral amputees. A non-invasive alternative that avoids surgery would reduce costs and shorten certification time, significantly increasing the adoption of such systems. To explore this possibility, we compared results from a non-invasive, electro-cutaneous stimulation system to outcomes observed with the use of implants in above the knee amputees. This non-invasive solution was tested in transfemoral amputees through evaluation of their ability to perceive and recognize touch intensity and locations, or movements of a prosthesis, and its cognitive integration (through dual task performance and perceived prosthesis weight). While this managed to evoke the perception of different locations on the artificial foot, and closures of the leg, it was less performant than invasive solutions. Non-invasive stimulation induced similar improvements in dual motor and cognitive tasks compared to neural feedback. On the other hand, results demonstrate that remapped, evoked sensations are less informative and intuitive than the neural evoked somatotopic sensations. The device therefore fails to improve prosthesis embodiment together with its associated weight perception. This preliminary evaluation meaningfully highlights the drawbacks of non-invasive systems, but also demonstrates benefits when performing multiple tasks at once. Importantly, the improved dual task performance is consistent with invasive devices, taking steps towards the expedited development of a certified device for widespread use. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9537330 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95373302022-10-08 Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback Chee, Lauren Valle, Giacomo Preatoni, Greta Basla, Chiara Marazzi, Michele Raspopovic, Stanisa Sci Rep Article A non-optimal prosthesis integration into an amputee’s body schema suggests some important functional and health consequences after lower limb amputation. These include low perception of a prosthesis as a part of the body, experiencing it as heavier than the natural limb, and cognitively exhausting use for users. Invasive approaches, exploiting the surgical implantation of electrodes in residual nerves, improved prosthesis integration by restoring natural and somatotopic sensory feedback in transfemoral amputees. A non-invasive alternative that avoids surgery would reduce costs and shorten certification time, significantly increasing the adoption of such systems. To explore this possibility, we compared results from a non-invasive, electro-cutaneous stimulation system to outcomes observed with the use of implants in above the knee amputees. This non-invasive solution was tested in transfemoral amputees through evaluation of their ability to perceive and recognize touch intensity and locations, or movements of a prosthesis, and its cognitive integration (through dual task performance and perceived prosthesis weight). While this managed to evoke the perception of different locations on the artificial foot, and closures of the leg, it was less performant than invasive solutions. Non-invasive stimulation induced similar improvements in dual motor and cognitive tasks compared to neural feedback. On the other hand, results demonstrate that remapped, evoked sensations are less informative and intuitive than the neural evoked somatotopic sensations. The device therefore fails to improve prosthesis embodiment together with its associated weight perception. This preliminary evaluation meaningfully highlights the drawbacks of non-invasive systems, but also demonstrates benefits when performing multiple tasks at once. Importantly, the improved dual task performance is consistent with invasive devices, taking steps towards the expedited development of a certified device for widespread use. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9537330/ /pubmed/36202893 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21057-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Chee, Lauren Valle, Giacomo Preatoni, Greta Basla, Chiara Marazzi, Michele Raspopovic, Stanisa Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback |
title | Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback |
title_full | Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback |
title_fullStr | Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback |
title_full_unstemmed | Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback |
title_short | Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback |
title_sort | cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9537330/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36202893 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-21057-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cheelauren cognitivebenefitsofusingnoninvasivecomparedtoimplantableneuralfeedback AT vallegiacomo cognitivebenefitsofusingnoninvasivecomparedtoimplantableneuralfeedback AT preatonigreta cognitivebenefitsofusingnoninvasivecomparedtoimplantableneuralfeedback AT baslachiara cognitivebenefitsofusingnoninvasivecomparedtoimplantableneuralfeedback AT marazzimichele cognitivebenefitsofusingnoninvasivecomparedtoimplantableneuralfeedback AT raspopovicstanisa cognitivebenefitsofusingnoninvasivecomparedtoimplantableneuralfeedback |