Keywords
neuroplasticity
post-amputation rehabilitation
movement intention prediction
phantom limb pain
How to Cite
Abstract
Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCI) represent a promising field in neuroengineering and rehabilitation medicine, particularly for patients with motor function impairments caused by limb amputations or neurological injuries. One of the key approaches in this domain is the use of Motor Imagery (MI) to identify motor intentions, enabling effective control of prostheses and neurotechnological devices. This review analyzes current methods of integrating MI into rehabilitation processes, specifically focusing on its application in restoring motor functions after amputation. Special attention is given to the mechanisms of motor intention detection using ElectroEncephaloGraphy (EEG), particularly Event-Related Desynchronization (ERD) and Event-Related Synchronization (ERS), which are primary features of sensorimotor rhythms during imagined movement. The review considers experimental studies evaluating the effectiveness of MI in rehabilitation and prosthetic control. It examines the use of MI to reduce phantom limb pain, improve somatosensory cortical organization, and control lower limb prostheses, providing a natural sense of movement even in complex conditions. Experimental data also suggest that integrating MI with Virtual Reality (VR) enhances patient motivation and reduces physical strain during rehabilitation. Key challenges discussed include the low signal-to-noise ratio in EEG and individual differences in patients' MI abilities. The analysis confirms that MI technologies can significantly improve the quality of life for individuals with motor function impairments, promoting both physical and cognitive recovery. Prospective research directions include optimizing motor intention recognition algorithms, enhancing EEG interpretation accuracy, and expanding the potential of MI in controlling complex prosthetic systems.
Keywords: Brain-Computer Interface, neuroplasticity, post-amputation rehabilitation, movement intention prediction, phantom limb pain.
References
Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, Heetderks WJ, McFarland DJ, Peckham PH, Schalk G. Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 2000;8(2):164-73. DOI: 10.1109/tre.2000.847807. PMID: 10896178
Di Rienzo F, Debarnot U, Daligault S, Saruco E, Delpuech C, Doyon J, et al. Online and offline performance gains following motor imagery practice: a comprehensive review of behavioral and neuroimaging studies. Front Hum Neurosci. 2016;10:315. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00315. PMID: 27445755.
Raffin E, Giraux P, Reilly KT. The moving phantom: motor execution or motor imagery? Cortex. 2012;48(6):746-57. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.02.003. PMID: 21397901.
Raffin E, Mattout J, Reilly KT, Giraux P. Disentangling motor execution from motor imagery with the phantom limb. Brain. 2012;135(2):582-95. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awr337. PMID: 22345089.
Saruco E, Guillot A, Saimpont A, Di Rienzo F, Durand A, Mercier C, et al. Motor imagery ability of patients with lower-limb amputation: exploring the course of rehabilitation effects. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2019;55(5):634-45. DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.17.04776-1. PMID: 29144105.
Cunha RG, Da-Silva PJG, Paz CCdSC, Ferreira ACdS, Tierra-Criollo CJ. Influence of functional task-oriented mental practice on the gait of transtibial amputees: a randomized, clinical trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2017;14:28. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-017-0238-x. PMID: 28399873.
Moxey PW, Gogalniceanu P, Hinchliffe RJ, Loftus IM, Jones KJ, Thompson MM, et al. Lower extremity amputations – a review of global variability in incidence. Diabet Med. 2011;28(10):1144-53. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03279.x. PMID: 21388445.
Tucker MR, Olivier J, Pagel A, Bleuler H, Bouri M, Lambercy O, et al. Control strategies for active lower extremity prosthetics and orthotics: a review. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015;12:1. DOI: 10.1186/1743-0003-12-1. PMID: 25557982
Al-Quraishi MS, Elamvazuthi I, Daud SA, Parasuraman S, Borboni A. EEG-based control for upper and lower limb exoskeletons and prostheses: a systematic review. Sensors (Basel). 2018;18(10):3342. DOI: 10.3390/s18103342. PMID: 30301238
Murphy DP, Bai O, Gorgey AS, Fox J, Lovegreen WT, Burkhardt BW, et al. Electroencephalogram-based brain–computer interface and lower-limb prosthesis control: a case study. Front Neurol. 2017;8:696. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2017.00696. PMID: 29326653.
Rimbert S, Trocellier D, Lotte F. Is event-related desynchronization variability correlated with BCI performance? 2022 IEEE Int Conf Metrol Ext Reality Artif Intell Neural Eng (MetroXRAINE). 2022;163-8. DOI: 10.1109/MetroXRAINE54828.2022.9967551.
Rea M, Rana M, Lugato N, Terekhin P, Gizzi L, Brötz D, et al. Lower limb movement preparation in chronic stroke: a pilot study toward an fNIRS-BCI for gait rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014;28(6):564-75. DOI: 10.1177/1545968313520410. PMID: 24482298.
Do AH, Wang PT, King CE, Chun SN, Nenadic Z. Brain-computer interface controlled robotic gait orthosis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2013;10:111. DOI: 10.1186/1743-0003-10-111. PMID: 24321081.
Ferrero L, Quiles V, Ortiz M, Ianez E, Gil-Agudo A, Azorin JM. Brain-computer interface enhanced by virtual reality training for controlling a lower limb exoskeleton. iScience. 2023;26(5):106675. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.106675. PMID: 37250318.
Delisle-Rodriguez D, Cardoso V, Gurve D, Loterio F, Romero-Laiseca MA, Krishnan S, et al. System based on subject-specific bands to recognize pedaling motor imagery: towards a BCI for lower-limb rehabilitation. J Neural Eng. 2019;16(5):056005. DOI: 10.1088/1741-2552/ab08c8. PMID: 30786265.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.