Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control.

Many laboratories have begun to develop brain-computer interface (BCI) systems that provide communication and control capabilities to people with severe motor disabilities. Further progress and realization of practical applications depends on systematic evaluations and comparisons of different brain signals, recording methods, processing algorithms, output formats, and operating protocols. However, the typical BCI system is designed specifically for one particular BCI method and is, therefore, not suited to the systematic studies that are essential for continued progress. In response to this problem, we have developed a documented general-purpose BCI research and development platform called BCI2000. BCI2000 can incorporate alone or in combination any brain signals, signal processing methods, output devices, and operating protocols. This report is intended to describe to investigators, biomedical engineers, and computer scientists the concepts that the BCI2000 system is based upon and gives examples of successful BCI implementations using this system. To date, we have used BCI2000 to create BCI systems for a variety of brain signals, processing methods, and applications. The data show that these systems function well in online operation and that BCI2000 satisfies the stringent real-time requirements of BCI systems. By substantially reducing labor and cost, BCI2000 facilitates the implementation of different BCI systems and other psychophysiological experiments. It is available with full documentation and free of charge for research or educational purposes and is currently being used in a variety of studies by many research groups.

/pdf/bci2000-a-general-purpose-brain-computer-interface-bci-45tcrd79ti.pdf

BCI2000: a general-purpose brain-computer interface (BCI) system

The brain's electrical signals enable people without muscle control to physically interact with the world.

Brain-computer interfaces for communication and control

Over the past decade, many laboratories have begun to explore brain-computer interface (BCI) technology as a radically new communication option for those with neuromuscular impairments that prevent them from using conventional augmentative communication methods. BCI's provide these users with communication channels that do not depend on peripheral nerves and muscles. This article summarizes the first international meeting devoted to BCI research and development. Current BCI's use electroencephalographic (EEG) activity recorded at the scalp or single-unit activity recorded from within cortex to control cursor movement, select letters or icons, or operate a neuroprosthesis. The central element in each BCI is a translation algorithm that converts electrophysiological input from the user into output that controls external devices. BCI operation depends on effective interaction between two adaptive controllers, the user who encodes his or her commands in the electrophysiological input provided to the BCI, and the BCI which recognizes the commands contained in the input and expresses them in device control. Current BCI's have maximum information transfer rates of 5-25 b/min. Achievement of greater speed and accuracy depends on improvements in signal processing, translation algorithms, and user training. These improvements depend on increased interdisciplinary cooperation between neuroscientists, engineers, computer programmers, psychologists, and rehabilitation specialists, and on adoption and widespread application of objective methods for evaluating alternative methods. The practical use of BCI technology depends on the development of appropriate applications, identification of appropriate user groups, and careful attention to the needs and desires of individual users. BCI research and development will also benefit from greater emphasis on peer-reviewed publications, and from adoption of standard venues for presentations and discussion.

/pdf/brain-computer-interface-technology-a-review-of-the-first-4t5zj40dij.pdf

Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting

An analyte monitor includes a sensor, a sensor control unit, and a display unit. The sensor has, for example, a substrate, a recessed channel formed in the substrate, and conductive material disposed in the recessed channel to form a working electrode. The sensor control unit typically has a housing adapted for placement on skin and is adapted to receive a portion of an electrochemical sensor. The sensor control unit also includes two or more conductive contacts disposed on the housing and configured for coupling to two or more contact pads on the sensor. A transmitter is disposed in the housing and coupled to the plurality of conductive contacts for transmitting data obtained using the sensor. The display unit has a receiver for receiving data transmitted by the transmitter of the sensor control unit and a display coupled to the receiver for displaying an indication of a level of an analyte. The analyte monitor may also be part of a drug delivery system to alter the level of the analyte based on the data obtained using the sensor.

Analyte Monitoring Device And Methods Of Use

Using the reflected impedance property of an inductive couple (transformer), a modulation method, load-shift keying using circuit configuration modulator (LSK-CCM), was developed to perform data transmission from an implantable telemeter. With a very simple circuit, this method utilizes a radio-frequency electromagnetic field induced with a single pair of coils to transmit power into the implant and data out of it. >

Data transmission from an implantable biotelemeter by load-shift keying using circuit configuration modulator

An implanted neuroprosthesis supplying functional neuromuscular stimulation was used to provide grasp and release to tetraplegic individuals. This article describes the results, at a minimum of three years, for the first five patients to have operative implantation of an eight-channel stimulator-receiver. All of the patients had a clinically complete spinal cord injury with motor function remaining at the level of the fifth or sixth cervical nerve root. In addition to implantation of the stimulator system, each patient had augmentative operations on the hand to improve function. The procedures included tendon transfers, side-to-side tendon anastomoses, arthrodesis of the interphalangeal joint of the thumb, and rotational osteotomy of the radius. The neuroprosthesis provides two grasp patterns controlled by voluntary motion of the shoulder or wrist. Functional evaluations included measurement of pinch force, a grasp-release test, evaluation of the level of functional independence, and usage surveys. Pinch force ranged from eight to twenty-five newtons. All five patients demonstrated functional grasp patterns, had increased independence, and were able to use the neuroprosthesis at home on a regular basis. The implanted stimulator has proved to be safe and reliable, with seven years as the longest time in situ at the time of writing.

An implanted upper-extremity neuroprosthesis. Follow-up of five patients.

Restoration of functional control by electrical stimulation in the upper extremity of the quadriplegic patient.

Implanted neuroprostheses employing functional electrical stimulation (FES) provide grasp and release to individuals with tetraplegia. This paper describes and compares three methods of controlling the stimulated hand movement: shoulder position, wrist position and myoelectric activity from the wrist extensors. Three experienced neuroprosthesis users were evaluated with each of the control methods by performing a grasp release test (GRT). A significant improvement was found between each functional electrical stimulation (FES) method and tenodesis without FES. No significant difference in overall performance was found between the three FES methods of control. Each method of control demonstrated advantages and disadvantages which depend upon characteristics of the individual patient. Factors which must be considered are injury level, voluntary wrist strength, proximal upper limb strength, the level of cognition of the patient, hand-grasp characteristics, cosmeses, importance of using both arms, and personal preference. Due to the unique characteristics of each controller type, it is advantageous to have each type available for the FES patients to adapt the system to the needs and desires of the individual patient.

A comparison between control methods for implanted FES hand-grasp systems

Cortical signals might provide a potential means of interfacing with a neuroprosthesis. Guidelines regarding the necessary control features in terms of both performance characteristics and user requirements are presented, and their implications for the design of a first generation cortical control interface for a neuroprosthesis are discussed.

/pdf/applications-of-cortical-signals-to-neuroprosthetic-control-n6moadnfi1.pdf

P.H. Peckham

Papers

Data transmission from an implantable biotelemeter by load-shift keying using circuit configuration modulator

An implanted upper-extremity neuroprosthesis. Follow-up of five patients.

Restoration of functional control by electrical stimulation in the upper extremity of the quadriplegic patient.

A comparison between control methods for implanted FES hand-grasp systems

Applications of cortical signals to neuroprosthetic control: a critical review