Perceptual Differences between Cortical and Peripheral Stimulation Strategies for Sensory Restoration
Hutchison, B.; Bose, R.; Spilker, B.; Bhat, P.; Memberg, W.; Ketting-Olivier, A.; Herring, E.; Sweet, J.; Miller, J.; Kirsch, R.; Ajiboye, A. B.; Graczyk, E.
Show abstract
Both intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) and peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) can restore tactile sensation to people living with physical disabilities, such as spinal cord injury (SCI) or amputation. While both techniques have demonstrated success in evoking meaningful sensations in the upper limb, they have only been investigated in separate studies with different patient populations, and thus their perceptual characteristics have never been systematically compared to determine the relative advantages and limitations of each approach. In this study, we directly compared the perceived sensations evoked by ICMS and PNS to those evoked by mechanical touch in a participant with sensory incomplete spinal cord injury. We observed that ICMS evoked more localized percepts and felt more qualitatively similar to natural touch than PNS, whereas PNS evoked higher intensity and more reliable percepts than ICMS. We also found that, across stimulation approaches, the perceived naturalness ratings of sensations were more strongly related to the other perceptual variables than to stimulation variables, suggesting that naturalness is a higher order perceptual dimension that is cognitively constructed by the participant. Our results indicate that ICMS may be the better sensory stimulation approach for conveying naturalistic touch experiences during haptic exploration, due to its similarity to mechanical touch in perceptual quality. In contrast, PNS may be the better stimulation modality to deliver consistent and effective sensory feedback during closed-loop functional tasks, due to its higher reliability. These insights provide a framework for future development of patient-specific sensory neuroprostheses based on the needs and goals of the user.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Closed-loop stimulation of lateral cervical spinal cord in upper-limb amputees to enable sensory discrimination 96%
- Evaluating phasic transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) with pupil dilation: the importance of stimulation intensity and sensory perception 96%
- Guided by touch: Tactile Cues in Hand Movement Control 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Biomimetic stimulation patterns drive natural artificial touch percepts using intracortical microstimulation in humans 96%
- A biomimetic electrical stimulation strategy to induce asynchronous stochastic neural activity 95%
- NeurostimML: A machine learning model for predicting neurostimulation-induced tissue damage 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Reconnecting the Hand and Arm to the Brain: Efficacy of Neural Interfaces for Sensorimotor Restoration after Tetraplegia 95%
- Deep brain stimulation improves symptoms of spasmodic dysphonia through targeting of thalamic sensorimotor connectivity 89%
- A Porcine Model of Peripheral Nerve Injury Enabling Ultra-Long Regenerative Distances: Surgical Approach, Recovery Kinetics, and Clinical Relevance 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.