Brain-computer interfaces (BCI) are used in stroke rehabilitation to translate brain signals into intended movements of the paralyzed limb. However, the efficacy and mechanisms of BCI-based therapies remain unclear. Here we show that BCI coupled to functional electrical stimulation (FES) elicits significant, clinically relevant, and lasting motor recovery in chronic stroke survivors more effectively than sham FES. Such recovery is associated to quantitative signatures of functional neuroplasticity. BCI patients exhibit a significant functional recovery after the intervention, which remains 6–12 months after the end of therapy. Electroencephalography analysis pinpoints significant differences in favor of the BCI group, mainly consisting in an increase in functional connectivity between motor areas in the affected hemisphere. This increase is significantly correlated with functional improvement. Results illustrate how a BCI–FES therapy can drive significant functional recovery and purposeful plasticity thanks to contingent activation of body natural efferent and afferent pathways.
Motor recovery following stroke is believed to necessitate alteration in functional connectivity between cortex and muscle. Cortico-muscular coherence has been proposed as a potential biomarker for post-stroke motor deficits, enabling a quantification of recovery, as well as potentially indicating the regions of cortex involved in recovery of function. We recorded simultaneous EEG and EMG during wrist extension from healthy participants and patients following ischaemic stroke, evaluating function at three time points post-stroke. EEG–EMG coherence increased over time, as wrist mobility recovered clinically, and by the final evaluation, coherence was higher in the patient group than in the healthy controls. Moreover, the cortical distribution differed between the groups, with coherence involving larger and more bilaterally scattered areas of cortex in the patients than in the healthy participants. The findings suggest that EEG–EMG coherence has the potential to serve as a biomarker for motor recovery and to provide information about the cortical regions that should be targeted in rehabilitation therapies based on real-time EEG.
Motor imagery (MI) has been largely studied as a way to enhance motor learning and to restore motor functions. Although it is agreed that users should emphasize kinesthetic imagery during MI, recordings of MI brain patterns are not sufficiently reliable for many subjects. It has been suggested that the usage of somatosensory feedback would be more suitable than standardly used visual feedback to enhance MI brain patterns. However, somatosensory feedback should not interfere with the recorded MI brain pattern. In this study we propose a novel feedback modality to guide subjects during MI based on sensory threshold neuromuscular electrical stimulation (St-NMES). St-NMES depolarizes sensory and motor axons without eliciting any muscular contraction. We hypothesize that St-NMES does not induce detectable ERD brain patterns and fosters MI performance. Twelve novice subjects were included in a cross-over design study. We recorded their EEG, comparing St-NMES with visual feedback during MI or resting tasks. We found that St-NMES not only induced significantly larger desynchronization over sensorimotor areas (p<0.05) but also significantly enhanced MI brain connectivity patterns. Moreover, classification accuracy and stability were significantly higher with St-NMES. Importantly, St-NMES alone did not induce detectable artifacts, but rather the changes in the detected patterns were due to an increased MI performance. Our findings indicate that St-NMES is a promising feedback in order to foster MI performance and cold be used for BMI online applications.
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.