Neural machine interfaces for controlling multifunctional powered upper-limb prostheses

References

• Esquenazia A, Meier R. Rehabilitation in limb deficiency. 4. Limb amputation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 77, S18–24 (1996)
   Google Scholar
• Esquenazia A. Amputation rehabilitation and prosthetic restoration: from surgery to community reintegration. Disabil. Rehabil. 26(14/15), 831–836 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dillingham TR, Pezzin LE, MacKenzie EJ. Incidence, acute care length of stay, and discharge to rehabilitation of traumatic amputee patients: an epidemiologic study. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 79, 279–287 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atroshi I, Rosberg H-E. Epidemiology of amputations and severe injuries of the hand. Hand Clin. 17(3), 343–350 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ephraim PL, Dillingham TR, Sector M, Pezzin LE, MacKenzie EJ. Epidemiology of limb loss and congenital limb deficiency: A review of the Literature. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 84, 747–761 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith DG, Michael JW, Bowker JH (Ed.). Atlas of Amputations and Limb Deficiencies: Surgical, Prosthetic, and Rehabilitation Principles. 3rd Ed., AAOS, Rosemont, IL, USA (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Atkins DJ, Heard DCY, Donovan WH. Epidemiologic overview of individuals with upper-limb loss and their reported research priority. J. Prosthet. & Orthot. 8, 2–11 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Gaine WJ, Smart C, Bransby-Zachary M. Upper limb traumatic amputees: Review of prosthetic use. J. Hand Surg. (Br ) 22B(1), 73–76 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Davidson J. A comparison of upper limb amputees and patients with upper limb injuries using the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH). Disabil. Rehabil. 26(14/15), 917–923 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker PA, Scott RN. Myoelectric control of prostheses. Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 13, 283–310 (1986).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basmajian JV, DeLuca CJ. Muscle Alive. 5th Ed, Williams & Wilkes, Baltimore, MD, USA (1985).
   Google Scholar
• Muzumdar A (Ed.). Powered upper limb prostheses: Control, implementation and clinical application. Springer, Berlin, Germany (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Hudgins B, Parker P, Scott RN. A New strategy for multifunction myoelectric control. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 40(1), 82–94 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Englehart K, Hudgins B, Parker PA, Stevenson M. Classification of the myoelectric signal using time-frequency based representations. Med. Eng. Phys. 2, 431–438 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Chu JU, Moon I, Mun MS. A real-time EMG pattern recognition based on linear-nonlinear feature projection for multifunction myoelectric hand. Proceedings of 2005 IEEE 9th Int. Conf. on Rehabil. Robotics. Chicago, IL, USA, 295–298 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Petterson PE, Anderson M. The use of self organizing maps to evaluate myoelectric signals. Biomed Sci Instrum. 35,147–152 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Peleg D, Braiman E, Yom-Tov E, Inbar GF. Classification of finger activation for use in a robotic prosthesis arm. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 10(4), 290–294 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlik B, Tokhi MO, Alci M. A fuzzy clustering neural network architecture for multifunction upper-limb prosthesis. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 50(11), 1255–1261 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ajiboye AB, Weir RFff. A heuristic fuzzy logic approach to EMG pattern recognition for multifunctional prosthesis control. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 13(3), 280–291 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Assaf Y, Al-Nashash H. Surface myoelectric signal classification for prostheses control. J. Med. Eng. Technol. 29(5), 203–207 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chan ADC, Englehart KB. Continuous myoelectric control for powered prostheses using hidden Markov models. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 52(1), 121–124 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang Y, Englehart KB, Hudgins B, Chan ADC. A gaussian mixture model based classification scheme for myoelectric control of powered upper limb prostheses. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 52(11), 1801–1811 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bu N, Fukuda O, Tsuji T. EMG-based motion discrimination using a novel recurrent neural network. J. Intelligent Infor. Syst. 21(2), 113–125 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Englehart K, Hudgins B, Parker P. Multifunction control of prostheses using the myoelectric signal. Chapter 5, In: Intelligent Systems and Technologies in Rehabilitation Engineering, Teodorescu H-N , Jain LC (Ed), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 153–208 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Zecca M, Micera S, Carrozza MC, Dario P. Control of multifunctional prosthetic hands by processing the electromyographic signal. Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 30(4–6), 459–485 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Englehart K, Hudgins B. A robust, real-time control scheme for multifunction myoelectric control. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 50(7), 848–858 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrell TR, Weir RFff, Heckathorne CW. The effect of controller delay on box and block test performance. Conf. Proceedings of the Univ. of New Brunswick’s MyoElectric Controls / Powered Prosthetics Symposium (MEC’05). New Brunswick, Canada, 244–247 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Lock BA, Englehart K, Hudgin B. Real-time myoelectric control in a virtual environment to relate usability vs. Accuracy. Conf. Proceedings of the Univ. of New Brunswick’s MyoElectric Controls / Powered Prosthetics Symposium (MEC’05). New Brunswick, Canada, 122–126 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Soares A, Andrade A, Lamounier E, Carrijo R. The development of a virtual myoelectric prosthesis controlled by an emg pattern recognition system based on neural networks. J. Intelligent Infor. Syst. 21(2), 127–141 (2003).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sebelius FCP, Rosén BN, Lundborg GN. Refined myoelectric control in below-elbow amputees using artificial neural networks and a data glove. J. Hand Surg. 30A(4), 780–789 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fukuda O, Tsuji T, Kaneko M, Otsuka A. A human-assisting manipulator teleoperated by EMG signals and arm motions. IEEE Trans. Robotics Automation 19(2) 210–222 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Kuruganti U, Hudgins B, Scott RN. Two-channel enhancement of a multifunction control system. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 42(1), 109–111 (1995).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cote J, Mathieu PA. Mapping of the human upper arm muscle activity with an electrode matrix. Electromyogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 40(4), 215–223 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weir RFff, Troyk PR, DeMichele G, Kuiken T. Implantable Myoelectric Sensors (IMES) for upper-extremity prosthesis control – preliminary work. Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference of the IEEE EMBS, Cancun, Mexico, 1562–1565 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Weir RFff, Troyk PR, DeMichele G, Lowery M, Kuiken T. Implantable myoelectric sensors (IMES). Conf. Proceedings of the Univ. of New Brunswick’s MyoElectric Controls / Powered Prosthetics Symposium (MEC’05). New Brunswick, Canada, 93–97 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Loeb G. BIONTM system for distributed neural prosthetic interfaces. Med. Eng. Phys. 23(1), 9–18 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arcos I, Davis R, Fey K, et al. Second-generation microstimulator. Artif. Organs 26(3), 228–231 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stykov NS, Lowery MM, Heckman CJ, Taflove A, Kuiken TA. Recording Intramuscular EMG signals using surface electrodes. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE 9th Int Conf. on Rehabil. Robotics, Chicago, IL, USA, 291–294 (2005)
   Google Scholar
• Kuiken T. Consideration of nerve-muscle grafts to improve the control of artificial arms. Technol. Disabil. 15, 105–111 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Kuiken TA, Dumanian GA, Lipschutz RD, Miller LA, Stubblefield KA. The use of targeted muscle reinnervation for improved myoelectric prosthesis control in a bilateral shoulder disarticulation amputee. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 28, 245–253 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipschutz RD, Miller LA, Stubblefield KA, Dumanian G, Phillips ME, Kuiken TA. Transhumeral level fitting and outcomes following targeted hyper-reinnervation nerve transfer surgery. Conf. Proceedings of the Univ. of New Brunswick’s MyoElectric Controls / Powered Prosthetics Symposium (MEC’05). New Brunswick, Canada, 2–5 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Miller LA, Lipschutz RD, Stubblefield KA, Kuiken TA. Fitting and outcomes of a bilateral shoulder disarticulation amputee following targeted hyper-reinnervation nerve transfer surgery. Conf. Proceedings of the Univ. of New Brunswick’s MyoElectric Controls / Powered Prosthetics Symposium (MEC’05). New Brunswick, Canada, 6–10 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Kyberd PJ, Chappell PH. The Southampton Hand: an intelligent myoelectric prosthesis. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 31(4), 326–334 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light CM, Chappell PH, Hudgins B, Engelhart K. Intelligent multifunction myoelectric control of hand prostheses. J. Med. Eng. Technol. 26(4), 139–146 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Okuno R, Yoshida M, Akazawa K. Compliant grasp in a myoelectric hand prosthesisIEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag. 24(4), 48–56 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Horch KW, Dhillon GS (Ed.). Neuroprosthetics theory and practice: Theory and practice. World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Lawrence SM, Dhillon GS, Horch KW. Fabrication and characteristics of an implantable, polymer-based, intrafascicular electrode. J. Neurosci. Meth. 131, 9–26 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lawrence SM, Dhillon GS, Jensen W, Yoshida K, Horch KW. Acute peripheral nerve recording characteristics of polymer-based longitudinal intrafascicular electrodes. IEEE Trans Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 12(3), 345–348 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lawrence SM, Larsen JO, Horch KW, Riso R, Sinkjaer T. Long-term biocompatibility of implanted polymer-based intrafascicular electrodes. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 63(5), 501–506 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Branner A, Stein RB, Fernandez E, Aoyagi Y, Normann RA. Long-term stimulation and recording with a penetrating microelectrode array in cat sciatic nerve. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 51(1), 146–157 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Branner A, Normann RA. A multielectrode array for intrafascicular recording and stimulation in sciatic nerve of cats. Brain Res. Bull. 51(4), 293–306 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Donaldson NDN, Zhou L, Perkins TA, Munih M, Haugland M, Sinkjaer T. Implantable telemeter for long-term electroneurographic recordings in animals and humans. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 41, 654–664 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crampon MA, Brailovski V, Sawan M, Trochu F. Nerve cuff electrode with shape memory alloy armature: design and fabrication. Biomed. Mater. Eng. 12, 397–410 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Lucca CJ. Control of upper-limb prostheses: a case for neuroelectric control J. Med. Eng. Technol. 2(2), 57–61 (1978).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lichtenberg BK, De Luca CJ. Distinguishability of functionally distinct evoked neuroelectric signal on the surface of a nerve. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 26(4), 228–237 (1979).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kovacs GTA, Storment CW, Rosen JM. Regeneration microelectrode array for peripheral nerve recording and stimulation. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 39(9), 893–902 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiLorenzo DJ, Edell DJ, Koris MJ, Riso RR. Chronic intraneural electrical stimulation for prosthetic sensory feedback. Proceedings of the 1st Int. IEEE EMBS Conf. on Neural Eng. Capri Island, Italy, 116–119 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Stieglitz T, Ruf HH, Gross M, Schuettler M, Meyer J-UA. Biohybrid system to interface peripheral nerves after traumatic lesions: design of a high channel sieve electrode. Biosens. Bioelectron. 17, 685–696 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lago N, Ceballos D, Rodriguez FJ, Stieglitz T, Navarro X. Long term assessment of axonal regeneration through polyimide regenerative electrodes to interface the peripheral nerve. Biomaterials 26(14), 2021–2031 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Edell DJ. A peripheral nerve information transducer for amputees: long-term multichannel recordings from rabbit peripheral nerves. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 33(2), 203–214 (1986).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Navorro X, Krueger TB, Lago N, Micera S, Stieglitz T, Dario P. A critical review of interfaces with the peripheral nervous system for the control of neuroprostheses and hybrid bionic systems. J. Peripheral Nervous Syst. 10, 229–258 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dhillon GS, Lawrence SM, Hutchinson DT, Horch KW. Residual function in peripheral nerve stumps of amputees: Implications for neural control of artificial limbs. J. Hand Surg. 29A(4), 605–615 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dhillon GS, Krüger TB, Sandhu JS, Horch KW. Effects of short-term training on sensory and motor function in severed nerves of long-term human amputees. J. Neurophysiol. 93, 2625–2633 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warwick K, Gasson M, Hutt B, et al. The application of implant technology for cybernetic systems. Arch. Neurol. 60(10), 1369–1373 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gasson M, Hutt B, Goodhew I, Kyberd P, Warwick K. Invasive neural prosthesis for neural signal detection and nerve stimulation. Int. J. Adaptive Control Signal Proc. 19(5), 365–375 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, McFarland DJ, Pfurtscheller G, Vaughan TM. Brain–computer interfaces for communication and control. Clin. Neurophysiol. 113, 767–791 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, Heetderks WJ et al. Brain–computer interface technology: a review of the first international meeting. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 8(2), 164–173 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vaughan TM, Heetderks WJ, Trejo LJ et al. Brain-computer interface technology: a review of the Second International Meeting. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 11(2), 94–109 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolelis MA. Brain-machine interfaces to restore motor function and probe neural circuits. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 4(5), 417–422 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donoghue JP. Connecting cortex to machines: recent advances in brain interfaces. Nature Neurosci. 5, 1085–1088 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friehs GM, Zerris VA, Ojakangas CL, Fellows MR, Donoghue JP.Brain-Machine and Brain-Computer Interfaces. Stroke 35 (Suppl. I), 2702–2705 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lauer RT, Peckham PH, Kilgore KL, Heetderks WJ. Applications of cortical signals to neuroprosthetic control: a critical review. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 8(2), 205–208 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Guger C, Müller G, Krausz G, Neuper C. Brain oscillations control hand orthosis in a tetraplegic. Neurosci. Lett. 292, 211–214 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfurtscheller G, Neuper C, Müller GR et al. Graz-BCI: State of the art and clinical applications. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 11(2), 177–180 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Abboudi RL, Glass CA, Newby NA, Flint JA, Craelius W. A biomimetic controller for multifinger prosthesis. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 7(2), 121–129 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Curcie DJ, Flint JA, Craelius W. Biomimetic finger control by filtering of distributed forelimb pressures. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 9(1), 69–75 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Silva J, Heim W, Chau T. A self-contained, mechanomyography-driven externally powered prosthesis. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 86, 2066–2070 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregori B, Galie E, Accornero A. Surface electromyography and mechanomyography recording: a new differential composite probe. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 41, 665–669 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Heath GH. Control of proportional grasping using a myokinemetric signal.Technol. Disabil. 15, 73–83 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Davalli A, Sacchettia R, Fanin S, Avanzolini G, Urbano E. Biofeedback for upper limb myoelectric prostheses. Technol. Disabil. 13, 161–172 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Lundborg G, Rosen B, Lindberg S. Hearing as substitution for sensation: a new principle for artificial sensibility. J. Hand Surg. (Am) 24(2), 219–224 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuiken TA, Sensinger JW, Farrell TR, Weir RFff. Phantom limb sensory f eedback through nerve transfer surgery. Conf. Proceedings of the Univ. of New Brunswick’s MyoElectric Controls/Powered Prosthetics Symposium (MEC’05). New Brunswick, Canada, 25–29 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Lundborg G, Rosen B. Sensory substitution in prosthetics. Hand Clin. 17(3), 481–488 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riso RR. Strategies for providing upper extremity amputees with tactile and hand position feedback -moving closer to the bionic arm. Technol. Health Care 7, 401–409 (1999)
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dhillon GS, Horch KW. Direct neural sensory feedback and control of a prosthetic arm. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 13(4), 468–472 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romo R, Hernandez A, Zainos A, Broody CD, Lemus L. Sensing without touching: psychophysical performance based on cortical microstimulation. Neuron 26, 273–278 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson DC. The choice of control sustem for the multi-movement prosthesis: Extended physiological proprioception (EPP). In: The control of upper-extremity prostheses and orthoses, (Herberts P et al. Eds), Springfield, Illinois, C.C Thomas, 146–150 (1974).
   Google Scholar
• Maruishi M,Tanaka Y, Muranaka H et al. Brain activation during manipulation of the myoelectric prosthetic hand: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. NeuroImage 21, 1604–1611 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar