BackgroundDeficits of kinesthesia (limb position and movement sensation) commonly limit sensorimotor function and its recovery after neuromotor injury. Sensory substitution technologies providing synthetic kinesthetic feedback might re-establish or enhance closed-loop control of goal-directed behaviors in people with impaired kinesthesia.MethodsAs a first step toward this goal, we evaluated the ability of unimpaired people to use vibrotactile sensory substitution to enhance stabilization and reaching tasks. Through two experiments, we compared the objective and subjective utility of two forms of supplemental feedback – limb state information or hand position error – to eliminate hand position drift, which develops naturally during stabilization tasks after removing visual feedback.ResultsExperiment 1 optimized the encoding of limb state feedback; the best form included hand position and velocity information, but was weighted much more heavily toward position feedback. Upon comparing optimal limb state feedback vs. hand position error feedback in Experiment 2, we found both encoding schemes capable of enhancing stabilization and reach performance in the absence of vision. However, error encoding yielded superior outcomes - objective and subjective - due to the additional task-relevant information it contains.ConclusionsThe results of this study have established the immediate utility and relative merits of two forms of vibrotactile kinesthetic feedback in enhancing stabilization and reaching actions performed with the arm and hand in neurotypical people. These findings can guide future development of vibrotactile sensory substitution technologies for improving sensorimotor function after neuromotor injury in survivors who retain motor capacity, but lack proprioceptive integrity in their more affected arm.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12984-017-0248-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Many survivors of stroke have persistent somatosensory deficits on the contralesional side of their body. Non-invasive supplemental feedback of limb movement could enhance the accuracy and efficiency of actions involving the upper extremity, potentially improving quality of life after stroke. In this proof-of-concept study, we evaluated the feasibility and the immediate effects of providing supplemental kinesthetic feedback to stroke survivors, performing goal-directed actions with the contralesional arm. Three survivors of stroke in the chronic stage of recovery participated in experimental sessions wherein they performed reaching and stabilization tasks with the contralesional arm under different combinations of visual and vibrotactile feedback, which was induced on the ipsilesional arm. Movement kinematics were encoded by a vibrotactile feedback interface in two ways: state feedback—an optimal combination of hand position and velocity; and error feedback—the difference between the actual hand position and its instantaneous target. In each session we evaluated the feedback encoding scheme’s immediate objective utility for improving motor performance as well as its perceived usefulness. All three participants improved their stabilization performance using at least one of the feedback encoding schemes within just one experimental session. Two of the participants also improved reaching performance with one or the other of the encoding schemes. Although the observed beneficial effects were modest in each participant, these preliminary findings show that supplemental vibrotactile kinesthetic feedback can be readily interpreted and exploited to improve reaching and object stabilizing actions performed with the contralesional arm after stroke. These short-term training results motivate a longer multisession training study using personalized vibrotactile feedback as a means to improve the accuracy and efficacy of contralesional arm actions after stroke.

No abstract