Quantitative evaluation of two methods of control bilateral stimulated hand grasps in persons with tetraplegia

• Published in: IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering 2000-06, Vol.8 (2), p.259-267
• Main Authors: Scott, T.R.D., Heasman, J.M., Vare, V.A., Flynn, R.Y., Gschwind, C.R., Middleton, J.W., Rutkowski, S.B.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Bioelectric phenomena; Biomechanics; Control systems; Electric Stimulation Therapy - instrumentation; Electrodes; Electrodes, Implanted; Force control; Functional Laterality - physiology; Hand Strength - physiology; Humans; Implants (surgical); Instruments; Joints (anatomy); Monitoring; Muscle; Muscle, Skeletal - innervation; Muscles; Quadriplegia - physiopathology; Quadriplegia - rehabilitation; Size control; Spinal cord; Spinal Cord Injuries - physiopathology; Spinal Cord Injuries - rehabilitation; Target tracking; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation - instrumentation; Wrist
• ISSN: 1063-6528; 1534-4320; 1558-0024; 1558-0210
• DOI: 10.1109/86.847827

Electrical stimulation has been applied to the paralyzed muscles of both hands of two persons with tetraplegia using percutneous acid implantable electrodes. Two separate methods of user control were being investigated. The first monitored the myoelectric signals from the user's own sternocleidomastoid muscles and the second monitored wrist joint angle. These signals were used as commands to modify the stimulated grasps. The hands were instrumented to detect the degree of hand closure and grip force and the users matched these to specific target parameters using the controller during tracking tasks. Performance in these tracking tasks was measured quantitatively. Wrist control was found to be less sensitive to the direction of hand opening/closing required than the myoelectric control. The user's performance with the myoelectric control demonstrated sensitivity to the target size and the speed of hand movement in response to the command control. The wrist controller required less training than the myoelectric controller for users to become proficient in its use. Based on these results, the wrist controller and the myoelectric controller both provide successful control of bilateral hand grasp and release. Of the two controllers, the wrist controller is likely to provide the greater ease of use, although it is only available to the population of users with active wrist extension.