Many upper limb amputees experience an incessant, post-amputation “phantom limb pain” and report that their missing limbs feel paralyzed in an uncomfortable posture. One hypothesis is that efferent commands no longer generate expected afferent signals, such as proprioceptive feedback from changes in limb configuration, and that the mismatch of motor commands and visual feedback is interpreted as pain. Non-invasive therapeutic techniques for treating phantom limb pain, such as mirror visual feedback (MVF), rely on visualizations of postural changes. Advances in neural interfaces for artificial sensory feedback now make it possible to combine MVF with a high-tech “rubber hand” illusion, in which subjects develop a sense of embodiment with a fake hand when subjected to congruent visual and somatosensory feedback. We discuss clinical benefits that could arise from the confluence of known concepts such as MVF and the rubber hand illusion, and new technologies such as neural interfaces for sensory feedback and highly sensorized robot hand testbeds, such as the “BairClaw” presented here. Our multi-articulating, anthropomorphic robot testbed can be used to study proprioceptive and tactile sensory stimuli during physical finger–object interactions. Conceived for artificial grasp, manipulation, and haptic exploration, the BairClaw could also be used for future studies on the neurorehabilitation of somatosensory disorders due to upper limb impairment or loss. A remote actuation system enables the modular control of tendon-driven hands. The artificial proprioception system enables direct measurement of joint angles and tendon tensions while temperature, vibration, and skin deformation are provided by a multimodal tactile sensor. The provision of multimodal sensory feedback that is spatiotemporally consistent with commanded actions could lead to benefits such as reduced phantom limb pain, and increased prosthesis use due to improved functionality and reduced cognitive burden.
During contact, phasic and tonic responses provide feedback that is used for task performance and perceptual processes. These disparate temporal dynamics are carried in peripheral nerves, and produce overlapping signals in cortex. Using longitudinal intrafascicular electrodes inserted into the median nerve of a nonhuman primate, we delivered composite stimulation consisting of onset and release bursts to capture rapidly adapting responses and sustained stochastic stimulation to capture the ongoing response of slowly adapting receptors. To measure the stimulation’s effectiveness in producing natural responses, we monitored the local field potential in somatosensory cortex. We compared the cortical responses to peripheral nerve stimulation and vibrotactile/punctate stimulation of the fingertip, with particular focus on gamma band (30–65 Hz) responses. We found that vibrotactile stimulation produces consistently phase locked gamma throughout the duration of the stimulation. By contrast, punctate stimulation responses were phase locked at the onset and release of stimulation, but activity maintained through the stimulation was not phase locked. Using these responses as guideposts for assessing the response to the peripheral nerve stimulation, we found that constant frequency stimulation produced continual phase locking, whereas composite stimulation produced gamma enhancement throughout the stimulus, phase locked only at the onset and release of the stimulus. We describe this response as an “Appropriate Response in the gamma band” (ARγ), a trend seen in other sensory systems. Our demonstration is the first shown for intracortical somatosensory local field potentials. We argue that this stimulation paradigm produces a more biomimetic response in somatosensory cortex and is more likely to produce naturalistic sensations for readily usable neuroprosthetic feedback.
Tactile cues arising from interactions with objects have a sense of directionality which affects grasp. Low latency responses to varied grip perturbations indicate that grasp safety margins are exaggerated in certain directions and conditions. In a grip with the ulnar-radial axis vertical, evidence suggests that distal and downward directions are more sensitive to task parameters and have larger safety margins. This suggests that, for the purpose of applying forces with the fingers, reference frames with respect to the hand and gravity are both in operation. In this experiment, we examined human sensitivities to the direction of tactile movement in the context of precision grip in orientations either orthogonal to or parallel to gravity. Subjects performed a two-alternative-forced-choice task involving a textured cube which moved orthogonal to their grip axis. Subjects’ arms were placed in a brace that allowed for finger movement but minimized arm movement. Movement of thumb and index joints were monitored via PhaseSpace motion capture. The subject was presented with a textured cube and instructed to lightly grasp the cube, as if it were slipping. In each trial the object was first translated 1 cm in 0° (proximal), 90° (radial), 180° (distal), or 270° (ulnar) and returned to its origin. This primary stimulus was immediately followed by a 10 mm secondary stimulus at a random 5° interval between −30° and 30° of the primary stimulus. Response from the subject after each pair of stimuli indicated whether the test direction felt the same as or different from the primary stimulus. Traditional bias and sensitivity analyses did not provide conclusive results but suggested that performance is best in the ulnar-radial axis regardless of gravity. Modeling of the response curve generated a detection threshold for each primary stimulus. Lower thresholds, indicating improved detection, persisted in the ulnar-radial axis. Anisotropic thresholds of increased detection appear to coincide with digit displacement and appear to be independent of the grasp orientation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.