1
|
Steele CM, Burdick RJ, Dallal-York J, Shapira-Galitz Y, Abrams SW. EQUATOR Network Mapping Review for Dysphagia Research. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY 2024; 33:2207-2219. [PMID: 39151057 DOI: 10.1044/2023_ajslp-23-00306] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/18/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The EQUATOR Network is an international initiative aimed at improving published health research through use of reporting guidelines. We conducted a review to determine the extent to which EQUATOR Network guidelines contain recommendations relevant for dysphagia research in human subjects. METHOD We downloaded all 542 EQUATOR Network guidelines on November 8, 2022. Each guideline was reviewed by two independent raters and judged for relevance to dysphagia and related fields (e.g., otolaryngology, gastroenterology). Dysphagia-relevant guidelines pertaining to quantitative human subjects research were further inspected to identify reporting guidance regarding (a) general research elements (e.g., data collection, statistical methods), (b) participant characteristics (e.g., demographics, accrual, randomization), (c) screening and clinical/noninstrumental assessments, (d) videofluoroscopic examinations, (e) flexible endoscopic examinations, (f) other instrumentation in swallowing research, (g) dysphagia treatment, (h) patient-/care provider-reported outcome measures, and (i) any other narrowly specified focus relevant for research on swallowing. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. RESULTS Of 542 guidelines, 156 addressed quantitative research in human subjects relevant to dysphagia. Of these, 104 addressed general research elements and 108 addressed participant characteristics. Only 14 guidelines partially addressed the other topics of interest, and none addressed elements relevant to reporting videofluoroscopic or endoscopic assessments of swallowing. CONCLUSIONS We were unable to find guidelines with specific relevance to reporting key methods in dysphagia research. This lack of guidance illustrates a gap that hinders the critical appraisal of research quality in the field of dysphagia. Our review highlights the need to develop dysphagia-specific tools for critical appraisal and guidance regarding adequate research reporting. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.25014017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catriona M Steele
- Swallowing Rehabilitation Research Laboratory, KITE Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Canada Research Chair in Swallowing and Food Oral Processing, Canada Research Chairs Secretariat, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ryan J Burdick
- Swallowing and Salivary Bioscience Lab, Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Wisconsin-Madison
| | - Justine Dallal-York
- Laboratory for the Study of Upper Airway Dysfunction, Department of Biobehavioral Sciences, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY
| | - Yael Shapira-Galitz
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel
- Hadassah School of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Sophia Werden Abrams
- Aging Swallow Research Laboratory, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Thota AK, Jung R. Accelerating neurotechnology development using an Agile methodology. Front Neurosci 2024; 18:1328540. [PMID: 38435056 PMCID: PMC10904481 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2024.1328540] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2023] [Accepted: 01/18/2024] [Indexed: 03/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Novel bioelectronic medical devices that target neural control of visceral organs (e.g., liver, gut, spleen) or inflammatory reflex pathways are innovative class III medical devices like implantable cardiac pacemakers that are lifesaving and life-sustaining medical devices. Bringing innovative neurotechnologies early into the market and the hands of treatment providers would benefit a large population of patients inflicted with autonomic and chronic immune disorders. Medical device manufacturers and software developers widely use the Waterfall methodology to implement design controls through verification and validation. In the Waterfall methodology, after identifying user needs, a functional unit is fabricated following the verification loop (design, build, and verify) and then validated against user needs. Considerable time can lapse in building, verifying, and validating the product because this methodology has limitations for adjusting to unanticipated changes. The time lost in device development can cause significant delays in final production, increase costs, and may even result in the abandonment of the device development. Software developers have successfully implemented an Agile methodology that overcomes these limitations in developing medical software. However, Agile methodology is not routinely used to develop medical devices with implantable hardware because of the increased regulatory burden of the need to conduct animal and human studies. Here, we provide the pros and cons of the Waterfall methodology and make a case for adopting the Agile methodology in developing medical devices with physical components. We utilize a peripheral nerve interface as an example device to illustrate the use of the Agile approach to develop neurotechnologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anil Kumar Thota
- Adaptive Neural Systems Group, The Institute for Integrative and Innovative Research, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States
| | - Ranu Jung
- Adaptive Neural Systems Group, The Institute for Integrative and Innovative Research, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States
- Biomedical Engineering Department, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ege F, Kazcı O. Brachial arteries sympathetic innervation: A contribution to anatomical knowledge. World J Neurol 2023; 9:1-7. [DOI: 10.5316/wjn.v9.i1.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2022] [Revised: 11/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/21/2022] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The sympathetic nervous system makes medium and large peripheral arteries smaller to slow the blood flowing through them.
AIM To observe brachial artery sympathetic innervation.
METHODS We developed a neurophysiological autonomous test that measured the effects of peripheral sympathetic fibres on peripheral arteries. Our specific objective was to find the sympathetic innervation of the brachial artery. To accomplish this purpose, the brachial artery baseline diameter and flow rate were measured in the right arm of the patients. Afterwards, electrical stimulus was applied to the medial nerve for 5 s. Through electrical sympathetic activation, the vessel diameter and overall flow rate will decrease. After 7 d, a similar experiment was repeated using the ulnar nerve.
RESULTS The differences in diameter and flow rate of the brachial artery in response to median and ulnar nerve activation were compared. In the total group, no significant difference in diameter was seen between medial and ulnar nerve stimulation (P = 0.648). The difference in absolute slowdown of flow rate between median nerve stimulation and ulnar nerve stimulation was not statistically significant for the entire group (P = 0.733).
CONCLUSION As a target organ, the brachial artery receives an equal amount of sympathetic innervation from the median and the ulnar nerves.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fahrettin Ege
- Department of Neurology, VM Medical Park Hospital Ankara, Ankara 06120, Turkey
| | - Omer Kazcı
- Department of Radiology, VM Medical Park, Ankara 06120, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pettersen E, Anderson J, Ortiz-Catalan M. Electrical stimulation to promote osseointegration of bone anchoring implants: a topical review. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2022; 19:31. [PMID: 35313892 PMCID: PMC8939223 DOI: 10.1186/s12984-022-01005-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2021] [Accepted: 03/01/2022] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Electrical stimulation has shown to be a promising approach for promoting osseointegration in bone anchoring implants, where osseointegration defines the biological bonding between the implant surface and bone tissue. Bone-anchored implants are used in the rehabilitation of hearing and limb loss, and extensively in edentulous patients. Inadequate osseointegration is one of the major factors of implant failure that could be prevented by accelerating or enhancing the osseointegration process by artificial means. In this article, we reviewed the efforts to enhance the biofunctionality at the bone-implant interface with electrical stimulation using the implant as an electrode. We reviewed articles describing different electrode configurations, power sources, and waveform-dependent stimulation parameters tested in various in vitro and in vivo models. In total 55 English-language and peer-reviewed publications were identified until April 2020 using PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Chalmers University of Technology Library discovery system using the keywords: osseointegration, electrical stimulation, direct current and titanium implant. Thirteen of those publications were within the scope of this review. We reviewed and compared studies from the last 45 years and found nonuniform protocols with disparities in cell type and animal model, implant location, experimental timeline, implant material, evaluation assays, and type of electrical stimulation. The reporting of stimulation parameters was also found to be inconsistent and incomplete throughout the literature. Studies using in vitro models showed that osteoblasts were sensitive to the magnitude of the electric field and duration of exposure, and such variables similarly affected bone quantity around implants in in vivo investigations. Most studies showed benefits of electrical stimulation in the underlying processes leading to osseointegration, and therefore we found the idea of promoting osseointegration by using electric fields to be supported by the available evidence. However, such an effect has not been demonstrated conclusively nor optimally in humans. We found that optimal stimulation parameters have not been thoroughly investigated and this remains an important step towards the clinical translation of this concept. In addition, there is a need for reporting standards to enable meta-analysis for evidence-based treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily Pettersen
- Center for Bionics and Pain Research, Mölndal, Sweden.,Department of Electrical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.,Center for Advanced Reconstruction of Extremities (C.A.R.E.), Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Mölndal, Sweden
| | - Jenna Anderson
- Center for Bionics and Pain Research, Mölndal, Sweden.,Center for Advanced Reconstruction of Extremities (C.A.R.E.), Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Mölndal, Sweden
| | - Max Ortiz-Catalan
- Center for Bionics and Pain Research, Mölndal, Sweden. .,Department of Electrical Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden. .,Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Huggins JE, Krusienski D, Vansteensel MJ, Valeriani D, Thelen A, Stavisky S, Norton JJS, Nijholt A, Müller-Putz G, Kosmyna N, Korczowski L, Kapeller C, Herff C, Halder S, Guger C, Grosse-Wentrup M, Gaunt R, Dusang AN, Clisson P, Chavarriaga R, Anderson CW, Allison BZ, Aksenova T, Aarnoutse E. Workshops of the Eighth International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting: BCIs: The Next Frontier. BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACES 2022; 9:69-101. [PMID: 36908334 PMCID: PMC9997957 DOI: 10.1080/2326263x.2021.2009654] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2021] [Accepted: 11/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
The Eighth International Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) Meeting was held June 7-9th, 2021 in a virtual format. The conference continued the BCI Meeting series' interactive nature with 21 workshops covering topics in BCI (also called brain-machine interface) research. As in the past, workshops covered the breadth of topics in BCI. Some workshops provided detailed examinations of specific methods, hardware, or processes. Others focused on specific BCI applications or user groups. Several workshops continued consensus building efforts designed to create BCI standards and increase the ease of comparisons between studies and the potential for meta-analysis and large multi-site clinical trials. Ethical and translational considerations were both the primary topic for some workshops or an important secondary consideration for others. The range of BCI applications continues to expand, with more workshops focusing on approaches that can extend beyond the needs of those with physical impairments. This paper summarizes each workshop, provides background information and references for further study, presents an overview of the discussion topics, and describes the conclusion, challenges, or initiatives that resulted from the interactions and discussion at the workshop.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jane E Huggins
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Neuroscience Graduate Program, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States 325 East Eisenhower, Room 3017; Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108-5744, 734-936-7177
| | - Dean Krusienski
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23219
| | - Mariska J Vansteensel
- UMC Utrecht Brain Center, Dept of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Antonia Thelen
- eemagine Medical Imaging Solutions GmbH, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - James J S Norton
- National Center for Adaptive Neurotechnologies, US Department of Veterans Affairs, 113 Holland Ave, Albany, NY 12208
| | - Anton Nijholt
- Faculty EEMCS, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Gernot Müller-Putz
- Institute of Neural Engineering, GrazBCI Lab, Graz University of Technology, Stremayrgasse 16/4, 8010 Graz, Austria
| | - Nataliya Kosmyna
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Media Lab, E14-548, Cambridge, MA 02139, Unites States
| | | | | | - Christian Herff
- School of Mental Health and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Christoph Guger
- g.tec medical engineering GmbH/Guger Technologies OG, Austria, Sierningstrasse 14, 4521 Schiedlberg, Austria, +43725122240-0
| | - Moritz Grosse-Wentrup
- Research Group Neuroinformatics, Faculty of Computer Science, Vienna Cognitive Science Hub, Data Science @ Uni Vienna University of Vienna
| | - Robert Gaunt
- Rehab Neural Engineering Labs, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 3520 5th Ave, Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, 412-383-1426
| | - Aliceson Nicole Dusang
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, School of Engineering, Brown University, Carney Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, RI
- Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Center for Neurorestoration and Neurotechnology, Rehabilitation R&D Service, Providence, RI
- Center for Neurotechnology and Neurorecovery, Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
| | | | - Ricardo Chavarriaga
- IEEE Standards Association Industry Connections group on neurotechnologies for brain-machine interface, Center for Artificial Intelligence, School of Engineering, ZHAW-Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland, Switzerland
| | - Charles W Anderson
- Department of Computer Science, Molecular, Cellular and Integrative Neurosience Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523
| | - Brendan Z Allison
- Dept. of Cognitive Science, Mail Code 0515, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, United States, 619-534-9754
| | - Tetiana Aksenova
- University Grenoble Alpes, CEA, LETI, Clinatec, Grenoble 38000, France
| | - Erik Aarnoutse
- UMC Utrecht Brain Center, Department of Neurology & Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
CHAVARRIAGA RICARDO, CARY CAROLE, LUIS CONTRERAS-VIDAL JOSE, MCKINNEY ZACH, BIANCHI LUIGI. Standardization of Neurotechnology for Brain-Machine Interfacing: State of the Art and Recommendations. IEEE OPEN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY 2021; 2:71-73. [PMID: 35402968 PMCID: PMC8846370 DOI: 10.1109/ojemb.2021.3061328] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2021] [Accepted: 02/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- RICARDO CHAVARRIAGA
- Chair, IEEE-SA IC Activity - Neurotechnology for Brain-Machine InterfacingZurich University of Applied Sciences, ZHAWWinterthurSwitzerland
| | - CAROLE CARY
- Chair, IEEE EMB Standards Committee Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society
| | - JOSE LUIS CONTRERAS-VIDAL
- FIEEE, FAIMBE, Co-Chair IEEE SA IC Activity Neurotechnology for Brain-Machine Interfacing, NSF IUCRC BRAINUniversity of Houston
| | - ZACH MCKINNEY
- Chair, IEEE P2794 Standards Working Group – Reporting Standards for in vivo Neural Interface Research (RSNIR)The BioRobotics Institute; European Ctr of Excellence in Robotics & AI, Scuola Superiore Sant'AnnaPisaItaly
| | - LUIGI BIANCHI
- Chair, IEEE P2731 Standards Working Group – Unified Terminology for Brain-Computer Interfaces Civil Engineering and Computer Science Engineering”Tor Vergata” University of RomeItaly
| |
Collapse
|