Psychometric characterization of incidental feedback sources during grasping with a hand prosthesis

Meike Annika Wilke, Christian Niethammer, Britta Meyer, Dario Farina, Strahinja Dosen

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

BACKGROUND: A prosthetic system should ideally reinstate the bidirectional communication between the user's brain and its end effector by restoring both motor and sensory functions lost after an amputation. However, current commercial prostheses generally do not incorporate somatosensory feedback. Even without explicit feedback, grasping using a prosthesis partly relies on sensory information. Indeed, the prosthesis operation is characterized by visual and sound cues that could be exploited by the user to estimate the prosthesis state. However, the quality of this incidental feedback has not been objectively evaluated.

METHODS: In this study, the psychometric properties of the auditory and visual feedback of prosthesis motion were assessed and compared to that of a vibro-tactile interface. Twelve able-bodied subjects passively observed prosthesis closing and grasping an object, and they were asked to discriminate (experiment I) or estimate (experiment II) the closing velocity of the prosthesis using visual (VIS), acoustic (SND), or combined (VIS + SND) feedback. In experiment II, the subjects performed the task also with a vibrotactile stimulus (VIB) delivered using a single tactor. The outcome measures for the discrimination and estimation experiments were just noticeable difference (JND) and median absolute estimation error (MAE), respectively.

RESULTS: The results demonstrated that the incidental sources provided a remarkably good discrimination and estimation of the closing velocity, significantly outperforming the vibrotactile feedback. Using incidental sources, the subjects could discriminate almost the minimum possible increment/decrement in velocity that could be commanded to the prosthesis (median JND < 2% for SND and VIS + SND). Similarly, the median MAE in estimating the prosthesis velocity randomly commanded from the full working range was also low, i.e., approximately 5% in SND and VIS + SND.

CONCLUSIONS: Since the closing velocity is proportional to grasping force in state-of-the-art myoelectric prostheses, the results of the present study imply that the incidental feedback, when available, could be usefully exploited for grasping force control. Therefore, the impact of incidental feedback needs to be considered when designing a feedback interface in prosthetics, especially since the quality of estimation using supplemental sources (e.g., vibration) can be worse compared to that of the intrinsic cues.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummer155
TidsskriftJournal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
Vol/bind16
Udgave nummer1
Antal sider13
ISSN1743-0003
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 10 dec. 2019

Fingerprint

Psychometrics
Prostheses and Implants
Hand
Visual Prosthesis
Differential Threshold
Sensory Feedback
Cues
Touch
Vibration
Amputation
Acoustics
Communication
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Brain

Citer dette

@article{030bdbd5de734310b73a529c84e70bba,
title = "Psychometric characterization of incidental feedback sources during grasping with a hand prosthesis",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: A prosthetic system should ideally reinstate the bidirectional communication between the user's brain and its end effector by restoring both motor and sensory functions lost after an amputation. However, current commercial prostheses generally do not incorporate somatosensory feedback. Even without explicit feedback, grasping using a prosthesis partly relies on sensory information. Indeed, the prosthesis operation is characterized by visual and sound cues that could be exploited by the user to estimate the prosthesis state. However, the quality of this incidental feedback has not been objectively evaluated.METHODS: In this study, the psychometric properties of the auditory and visual feedback of prosthesis motion were assessed and compared to that of a vibro-tactile interface. Twelve able-bodied subjects passively observed prosthesis closing and grasping an object, and they were asked to discriminate (experiment I) or estimate (experiment II) the closing velocity of the prosthesis using visual (VIS), acoustic (SND), or combined (VIS + SND) feedback. In experiment II, the subjects performed the task also with a vibrotactile stimulus (VIB) delivered using a single tactor. The outcome measures for the discrimination and estimation experiments were just noticeable difference (JND) and median absolute estimation error (MAE), respectively.RESULTS: The results demonstrated that the incidental sources provided a remarkably good discrimination and estimation of the closing velocity, significantly outperforming the vibrotactile feedback. Using incidental sources, the subjects could discriminate almost the minimum possible increment/decrement in velocity that could be commanded to the prosthesis (median JND < 2{\%} for SND and VIS + SND). Similarly, the median MAE in estimating the prosthesis velocity randomly commanded from the full working range was also low, i.e., approximately 5{\%} in SND and VIS + SND.CONCLUSIONS: Since the closing velocity is proportional to grasping force in state-of-the-art myoelectric prostheses, the results of the present study imply that the incidental feedback, when available, could be usefully exploited for grasping force control. Therefore, the impact of incidental feedback needs to be considered when designing a feedback interface in prosthetics, especially since the quality of estimation using supplemental sources (e.g., vibration) can be worse compared to that of the intrinsic cues.",
author = "Wilke, {Meike Annika} and Christian Niethammer and Britta Meyer and Dario Farina and Strahinja Dosen",
year = "2019",
month = "12",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1186/s12984-019-0622-9",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
journal = "Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation",
issn = "1743-0003",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

Psychometric characterization of incidental feedback sources during grasping with a hand prosthesis. / Wilke, Meike Annika; Niethammer, Christian; Meyer, Britta; Farina, Dario; Dosen, Strahinja.

I: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, Bind 16, Nr. 1, 155, 10.12.2019.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Psychometric characterization of incidental feedback sources during grasping with a hand prosthesis

AU - Wilke, Meike Annika

AU - Niethammer, Christian

AU - Meyer, Britta

AU - Farina, Dario

AU - Dosen, Strahinja

PY - 2019/12/10

Y1 - 2019/12/10

N2 - BACKGROUND: A prosthetic system should ideally reinstate the bidirectional communication between the user's brain and its end effector by restoring both motor and sensory functions lost after an amputation. However, current commercial prostheses generally do not incorporate somatosensory feedback. Even without explicit feedback, grasping using a prosthesis partly relies on sensory information. Indeed, the prosthesis operation is characterized by visual and sound cues that could be exploited by the user to estimate the prosthesis state. However, the quality of this incidental feedback has not been objectively evaluated.METHODS: In this study, the psychometric properties of the auditory and visual feedback of prosthesis motion were assessed and compared to that of a vibro-tactile interface. Twelve able-bodied subjects passively observed prosthesis closing and grasping an object, and they were asked to discriminate (experiment I) or estimate (experiment II) the closing velocity of the prosthesis using visual (VIS), acoustic (SND), or combined (VIS + SND) feedback. In experiment II, the subjects performed the task also with a vibrotactile stimulus (VIB) delivered using a single tactor. The outcome measures for the discrimination and estimation experiments were just noticeable difference (JND) and median absolute estimation error (MAE), respectively.RESULTS: The results demonstrated that the incidental sources provided a remarkably good discrimination and estimation of the closing velocity, significantly outperforming the vibrotactile feedback. Using incidental sources, the subjects could discriminate almost the minimum possible increment/decrement in velocity that could be commanded to the prosthesis (median JND < 2% for SND and VIS + SND). Similarly, the median MAE in estimating the prosthesis velocity randomly commanded from the full working range was also low, i.e., approximately 5% in SND and VIS + SND.CONCLUSIONS: Since the closing velocity is proportional to grasping force in state-of-the-art myoelectric prostheses, the results of the present study imply that the incidental feedback, when available, could be usefully exploited for grasping force control. Therefore, the impact of incidental feedback needs to be considered when designing a feedback interface in prosthetics, especially since the quality of estimation using supplemental sources (e.g., vibration) can be worse compared to that of the intrinsic cues.

AB - BACKGROUND: A prosthetic system should ideally reinstate the bidirectional communication between the user's brain and its end effector by restoring both motor and sensory functions lost after an amputation. However, current commercial prostheses generally do not incorporate somatosensory feedback. Even without explicit feedback, grasping using a prosthesis partly relies on sensory information. Indeed, the prosthesis operation is characterized by visual and sound cues that could be exploited by the user to estimate the prosthesis state. However, the quality of this incidental feedback has not been objectively evaluated.METHODS: In this study, the psychometric properties of the auditory and visual feedback of prosthesis motion were assessed and compared to that of a vibro-tactile interface. Twelve able-bodied subjects passively observed prosthesis closing and grasping an object, and they were asked to discriminate (experiment I) or estimate (experiment II) the closing velocity of the prosthesis using visual (VIS), acoustic (SND), or combined (VIS + SND) feedback. In experiment II, the subjects performed the task also with a vibrotactile stimulus (VIB) delivered using a single tactor. The outcome measures for the discrimination and estimation experiments were just noticeable difference (JND) and median absolute estimation error (MAE), respectively.RESULTS: The results demonstrated that the incidental sources provided a remarkably good discrimination and estimation of the closing velocity, significantly outperforming the vibrotactile feedback. Using incidental sources, the subjects could discriminate almost the minimum possible increment/decrement in velocity that could be commanded to the prosthesis (median JND < 2% for SND and VIS + SND). Similarly, the median MAE in estimating the prosthesis velocity randomly commanded from the full working range was also low, i.e., approximately 5% in SND and VIS + SND.CONCLUSIONS: Since the closing velocity is proportional to grasping force in state-of-the-art myoelectric prostheses, the results of the present study imply that the incidental feedback, when available, could be usefully exploited for grasping force control. Therefore, the impact of incidental feedback needs to be considered when designing a feedback interface in prosthetics, especially since the quality of estimation using supplemental sources (e.g., vibration) can be worse compared to that of the intrinsic cues.

U2 - 10.1186/s12984-019-0622-9

DO - 10.1186/s12984-019-0622-9

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 31823792

VL - 16

JO - Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

JF - Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

SN - 1743-0003

IS - 1

M1 - 155

ER -