Continuous supplementary tactile feedback can be applied (and then removed) to enhance precision manipulation

A Wearable Device for Hand Sensorimotor Rehabilitation Through Augmented Sensory Feedback

The loss of sensitivity of the upper limb due to central or peripheral neurological injuries severely limits the ability to manipulate objects, hindering personal independence. Non-invasive augmented sensory feedback techniques are used to promote neural plasticity hence to restore the grasping function. We devised a wearable device for hand sensorimotor rehabilitation capable of reliably detect transient tactile events based on custom piezoelectric polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) sensors and deliver discrete bursts of vibrations upon these events. We integrated the sensors into a fabric glove and tested the device in a pilot bench test exploring its ability to detect object contact and release as well as object slippage. Due to their broad bandwidth, the sensors proved to be suitable for both the applications: they responded with clear peaks when touching or releasing the object and increased the high-frequency content of the signal during slippage.

Neurorobotic fusion of prosthetic touch, kinesthesia, and movement in bionic upper limbs promotes intrinsic brain behaviors

[Figure: see text].

Testing silicone digit extensions as a way to suppress natural sensation to evaluate supplementary tactile feedback

Dexterous use of the hands depends critically on sensory feedback, so it is generally agreed that functional supplementary feedback would greatly improve the use of hand prostheses. Much research still focuses on improving non-invasive feedback that could potentially become available to all prosthesis users. However, few studies on supplementary tactile feedback for hand prostheses demonstrated a functional benefit. We suggest that confounding factors impede accurate assessment of feedback, e.g., testing non-amputee participants that inevitably focus intently on learning EMG control, the EMG’s susceptibility to noise and delays, and the limited dexterity of hand prostheses. In an attempt to assess the effect of feedback free from these constraints, we used silicone digit extensions to suppress natural tactile feedback from the fingertips and thus used the tactile feedback-deprived human hand as an approximation of an ideal feed-forward tool. Our non-amputee participants wore the extensions and performed a simple pick-and-lift task with known weight, followed by a more difficult pick-and-lift task with changing weight. They then repeated these tasks with one of three kinds of audio feedback. The tests were repeated over three days. We also conducted a similar experiment on a person with severe sensory neuropathy to test the feedback without the extensions. Furthermore, we used a questionnaire based on the NASA Task Load Index to gauge the subjective experience. Unexpectedly, we did not find any meaningful differences between the feedback groups, neither in the objective nor the subjective measurements. It is possible that the digit extensions did not fully suppress sensation, but since the participant with impaired sensation also did not improve with the supplementary feedback, we conclude that the feedback failed to provide relevant grasping information in our experiments. The study highlights the complex interaction between task, feedback variable, feedback delivery, and control, which seemingly rendered even rich, high-bandwidth acoustic feedback redundant, despite substantial sensory impairment.